Reply to: Being asked to do work outside of scope of original contract

[TheFaQQer]

You could ask for a different contract to cover that part (if it's worth your while to do it). If this is something that is outside your original contract, then you could run the risk of looking more like a disguised employee, if you are just doing what you are being told to do.

[cojak]

Why are we skirting round the issue here?!

I wasn't hired as a technical author. What makes you think I was?

As I said earlier, I was hired to provide "CBT Expertise". Specifically, to provide an Authorware programming capability. Authorware is a tool used to develop interactive multimedia products.

Now, is your answer still the same?!

I must say didn't sound quite like that originally, that's why you got those answers.

As a trainer, I can say that there's more to writing student workbooks than just writing what's on the e-course. You're going to need training specs and stuff and proper briefing from the course provider, you're also going to need to research and have knowledge of the content of the course. Workbooks are there to support the trainer.

If you want to stay as a programmer rather than move into training, I would be reluctant to do this, it might be a perfect opportunity to sub-contract.

Or you could just print out the inevitable Powerpoint presentation in note form and state that this is the way all supporting documentation is going.

Job done!

[shoes]

This sounds like an opportunity to me. You could view it as an opportunity to

= learn a new marketable skill whilst being paid for it. Another 'string to the bow'.

= use it as a basis to negotiate a higher rate

= sub contract it out to someone else for less than you are getting

[timh]

If I was contracted to do “A” and the asked to do “O” or even |OWA I would want more money.

[tommyrot]

Can't you get someone in to do it for you? If you can't deliver it yourself try and negotiate a substitute associate who has writing skills.

Yep, that sounds like a way forward. Thanks.

[tommyrot]

The bottom is for technical authors. If that is what you were hired as, then it seems perfectly reasonable to me.

I thought the client had asked you to water the flowers or something.

Why are we skirting round the issue here?!

I wasn't hired as a technical author. What makes you think I was?

As I said earlier, I was hired to provide "CBT Expertise". Specifically, to provide an Authorware programming capability. Authorware is a tool used to develop interactive multimedia products.

Now, is your answer still the same?!

[Sockpuppet]

So if I was contracted to provide, say, Java programming expertise, and then got switched to project management, you're saying that's okay because it's still provided "expertise"? Even if I've not done project management before, and have had no training in it, and such a role was never discusssed prior to signing the contract?

In this particular case, I have no 'expertise' in writing, and never claimed to have had. So right now, the client is receiving no expertise from me -- I'm just having a (reluctant) stab at it until the issue is resolved.

Just tell the client you can't do it as you dont have the skills then. If they still want you to do it you're still getting paid arent you.

[Denny]

*If* you'd paid for classroom-based training, I'd agree with you.

However, what the client has actually paid for in this instance is e-Learning, or Computer-based Training. The idea is that students will -- in their own time -- access multimedia training materials via the Internet and learn about the subject matter at hand via an interactive experience on their PCs.

Although the end result is the same (ie, people acquire new skills or knowledge), classroom-based training is as different from e-Learning as, say, real football is from a football game on the pc. The skillsets required to deliver each are often mutually exclusive, in fact.

Can't you get someone in to do it for you? If you can't deliver it yourself try and negotiate a substitute associate who has writing skills.

[Denny]

The "service" I was contracted to provide is, in the contract, "CBT [Computer-based Training] Expertise". CBT is otherwise known as e-Learning these days.

What I'm now being asked to do is write student workbooks for instructor-delivered classroom training.

The bottom is for technical authors. If that is what you were hired as, then it seems perfectly reasonable to me.

I thought the client had asked you to water the flowers or something.

[weemster]

Depends how you feel about the staying with the contract (sometimes best not to rock the boat if the contract is convenient and enjoyable). Depending on your situation either do the additional work (without any fuss - maybe from home) or tell the client that it isn't in the scope of the original agreement and agree a price.

[tommyrot]

I'm not a massive expert on training but from what I've seen training manuals etc come with the course as standard. If i paid for training and no training literature was provided I'd feel cheated.

*If* you'd paid for classroom-based training, I'd agree with you.

However, what the client has actually paid for in this instance is e-Learning, or Computer-based Training. The idea is that students will -- in their own time -- access multimedia training materials via the Internet and learn about the subject matter at hand via an interactive experience on their PCs.

Although the end result is the same (ie, people acquire new skills or knowledge), classroom-based training is as different from e-Learning as, say, real football is from a football game on the pc. The skillsets required to deliver each are often mutually exclusive, in fact.

[Spacecadet]

I'm not a massive expert on training but from what I've seen training manuals etc come with the course as standard. If i paid for training and no training literature was provided I'd feel cheated.

[tommyrot]

I'd say you'd have to do it. Writing a book is still providing your expertise.

So if I was contracted to provide, say, Java programming expertise, and then got switched to project management, you're saying that's okay because it's still provided "expertise"? Even if I've not done project management before, and have had no training in it, and such a role was never discusssed prior to signing the contract?

In this particular case, I have no 'expertise' in writing, and never claimed to have had. So right now, the client is receiving no expertise from me -- I'm just having a (reluctant) stab at it until the issue is resolved.

[Sockpuppet]

The "service" I was contracted to provide is, in the contract, "CBT [Computer-based Training] Expertise". CBT is otherwise known as e-Learning these days.

What I'm now being asked to do is write student workbooks for instructor-delivered classroom training.

I'd say you'd have to do it. Writing a book is still providing your expertise.

[Lola]

If I was contracted to do “A” and the asked to do “O” or even |OWA I would want more money.