The Resourceful Reporter, Part 7: Scopes of Work

In covering at descriptive reports, WORDS ON THE LINE has looked at meeting reviews, incident reports, investigation reports, inspection reports, and procedures. The scope of work is the sixth descriptive report in this series.

The scope of work (SOW) is also known as a work scope or statement of work. The SOW is the project management team's go-to document throughout a project. It describes the project requirements, activities, and milestones, legally obliging the signers to fulfill the terms it describes. The SOW can cover a task as simple as an hourlong paint job or a single pothole resurfacing; it can also cover an enterprise as massive as the rehabilitation of a thousand miles of railroad track or the construction of thousand-unit, square-mile housing development.   

SOWs typically have in common at least these eight parts:

1. Purpose – The reason for undertaking the project (e.g., offer greater capacity).
2. Scope – The work to be performed (e.g., expand the cafeteria by 5,000 square feet).
3. Site – The location of the work (e.g., the north side of the cafeteria).
4. Timeframe – The beginning and end dates of the work (e.g., commencing January 3, 2022 and concluding February 25, 2022). 
5. Deliverables – The tasks required of each craft, including acceptable materials and performance standards (e.g., concrete, electrical, plumbing, HVAC, carpentry, painting, masonry, roofing).
6. Milestones – Due dates for each task (e.g., utilities connected by January 5, foundation laid by January 7). 
7. Costs – The compensation schedule for performing the work (e.g., 25% of the payment due upon substantial completion of Phase 1). 
8. Contingencies – Remedial actions available to the client for service provider's non-performance (e.g., deductions from invoices for substandard work), or disclaimers for catastrophic events (e.g., earthquakes, hurricanes). 

The legal department or chief contracting officer usually reviews all SOWs for compliance with required standards.

The Resourceful Reporter, Part 6: Procedural Reports

Procedural reporting can fall into two non-mutually exclusive categories: how something happens (process) and how to do something (procedure).

The first category—how something happens—describes processes purely for informational purposes. Readers may not necessarily need to complete the process themselves. Examples include how an information technology department conducts disaster recovery operations, or how a firefighting team deploys to combat a forest fire, or how a district attorney’s office determines a criminal investigation has obtained sufficient evidence to warrant an indictment. In each of these cases, you do not need to be a chief information officer or a firefighter or a prosecuting lawyer to read such a document. In fact, you might be a CEO interested in comparing your disaster recovery operations to those of another company. Or you might be a safety investigator who wants to ensure that all protocols were followed during a fire resulting in several firefighter fatalities. Or you might be a judge who wants to see whether the evidence of a criminal trial was collected within the limits of the law.

The second category—how to do something—is of interest primarily to technicians or end users who need to complete a task. Let’s say a building contractor may need step-by-step instructions for how to apply for a building permit in a town unfamiliar to her, or a junior scientist may need a troubleshooting sheet to learn how to report aberrant test results, or a business associate may need instructions for syncing information from an office desktop to a company phone.

In some situations, these categories may blend. For instance, while an author may read about how an earthquake occurs to realistically depict such a scenario in a novel (process), a rescue team may read the same scenario for its sequence to choose the most effective step-by-step deployment during its occurrence in a high-risk area (procedure). On the other hand, only someone interested in changing the oil of their 2022 Honda Accord would likely read about how to do so efficiently (procedure). An investigator of a fatality follows a process of her own when examining whether the medical response team followed proper procedure in aiding a victim during the moments before his death.

It always comes down to the reader’s concerns. For this reason, procedures are more useful when they provide background information, such as:

• purpose of the procedure
• law or policy requiring the procedure
• required qualifications of the user
• time and place for performing the procedure
• consequences of not following the procedure
• acceptable equipment and materials for performing the procedure
• sources for reference about the procedure

Focused procedure writers remain true to these five principles when detailing sequential tasks for users:

1. Use action verbs instead of being verbs. Rather than Be aware of the safety protocol, write the more precise Use the safety protocol.

2. Use tactile verbs instead of checking verbs. Avoid the ambiguous Ensure that all toxic chemicals are properly stored in favor of the more specific Store all toxic chemicals properly.

3. Use Actor/Action approach for multiple performers. When more than one person or job title has to perform a step on an action list, start with the actor. Example:

1. System Administrator sends e-request for data to Team Leader.

2. Team Leader submits requested data to Risk Management.

3. Risk Management confirms receipt to Team Leader, System Administrator, and Legal.

4. Risk Management reviews case for accuracy and completeness.

5. Risk Management confirms accuracy and completeness of case with Legal.

6. Legal reviews case for compliance.

7. Legal approves e-request in System Administrator.

8. System Administrator notifies Team Leander and Risk Management of completed case.

4. Use Do/See tables to show outcomes. This practice separates results from required actions for greater clarity and conciseness. Example:

  

Action	Result
1. Go to www.helpmenow.com	The landing page appears.
2. Enter your username and password.	The request screen appears.
3. Check the appropriate box for your request.	The live Help Desk greets you.
4. Write your request or question in the field How Can I help you?	Await a response.

 In place of a results column, you can use precise screenshots as illustrations.

5. Use If/Then charts to show contingencies. This technique will simplify instructions. Example:

The Resourceful Reporter, Part 5: Inspection Reports

The fourth descriptive report in this series is the inspection report. While inspection reports are similar to investigation reports and incident reports in that they are based on verifiable evidence (pardon the necessary redundancy), they differ in two critical ways: their findings and their consequences. 

Findings. Inspection reports document inspectors' examinations of materials, equipment, grounds, or structures based on indisputable standards. For examples, an inspection report may state that 7% of 100,000 pairs of latex gloves in a shipment have perforations, or a compressor in an enclosed packaging facility runs at 125 dB, or refuse from two overturned trashcans were strewn across a lawn of a corporate park, or the foundation at the northwest corner of an office building has spalling running 2 meters long by 12 millimeters wide.

On the other hand, investigation reports and incident reports may cover human conduct that is subject to dispute by opposing parties. An investigation of sexual harassment may have only two witnesses to the allegation: the complainant and the accused, both of whom offer different accounts of what occurred. The same holds true for an incident report of a hallway fire, as two witnesses may claim it started at different times, resulted from different causes, and reached different levels of severity.  

Consequences. Inspection reports require responsible parties to correct noncompliant conditions and to maintain compliant conditions. The manufacturer of those perforated gloves may be contractually required to replace them, the engineering department may need to create a sound buffer for that noisy compressor, the grounds crew may need to secure those trashcans that spilled refuse, and the building owner may need to solve the spalling problem.

In contrast, investigation and incident reports are after-the-fact historical records of events that may or not require remediation. In the case of an investigation report on a physical assault resulting in permanent bodily injury, the assailant may be incarcerated and the victim may be financially compensated, but these actions will not reverse the physical damage done. Likewise, an incident report on a fire that destroyed a packaging facility may reach a root cause but not undo the devastation.  

Two Tips on Inspection Reports: Content and Structure

In terms of content, inspection reports should include the standard (e.g., any observed spalling requires remediation within 30 days of the report date), the source (e.g., Local Building Code 388.8), the finding (e.g., the foundation at the northwest corner of an office building has spalling running 2 meters long by 12 millimeters wide), and corrective action (e.g., repair spalling with Code-approved materials by December 1), and the follow-up (e.g., the inspector will reinspect for compliance within one month). 

As for structure, inspectors should get away from their traditional chronological approach to inspection reports in favor of a hierarchical approach. This practice will immediately focus the reader on the point.

Do not write this:

The December 13 inspection found three safety hazards:

• Flammable paint cans stored on the ground floor hallway.
• A missing doorknob on the third-floor rear emergency exit door.
• A skid of cartons blocking the west walkway.  

The building owner must correct these problems by December 17. 

Instead write this:

As a result of the December 13 inspection, the building owner must correct three safety hazards by December 17:

• Remove flammable paint cans stored on the ground floor hallway.
• Replace the missing doorknob on the third-floor rear emergency exit door.
• Remove the skid of cartons blocking the west walkway.  

The inspector will return on December 17 to ensure the premises are free of safety hazards.

The Resourceful Reporter, Part 4: Investigation Reports

I am grateful for the valuable help I received for this post from two friends: Joe Brooks, a former lieutenant for the New York City Police Department and retired special investigator for Lifespire, and Paul Cassone, former executive director of the Guild for Exceptional Children. 

The third descriptive report in this series is the investigation report. Some businesses see incident reports and investigation reports as synonymous, so I will distinguish between them for this discussion:

• An incident report covers an event that may be accidental (e.g., slip, trip, or fall) or intentional (e.g., physical assault), involving human, business, or property damage, which may or may not have disciplinary or legal consequences. An incident report can be written by a wide range of employees.
• An investigation report covers an event that may be accidental (e.g., train derailment caused by human error) or intentional (e.g., train derailment caused by terrorism), or it examines conduct that may be unethical (e.g., nepotism) or illegal (e.g., embezzlement), involving human, business, or property damage, which likely will have disciplinary or legal consequences. An investigation report should be written by a highly skilled investigator.

In-progress investigations may or may not be sufficiently grave to shut down an entire operation. A suicide on railroad tracks will automatically halt all train movement at the station. An explosion at a chemical facility will cease all production and require staff evacuation. An accusation of sexual harassment may cause the business to separate the accuser and the accused, but it is unlikely to suspend business activity. An allegation of fraud may lead to removing the accused from the workplace without interrupting business the flow.

Investigators may be concerned about the root cause of an event (e.g., an accidental train derailment or a fuel tank explosion), or they may have zero interest in cause (e.g., embezzlement or sexual harassment). I will look at root-cause reports later in this series.

All told, investigators have quite a challenging job. Needless to say, they need good writing skills, but the best of them possess these seven qualities: 

Perceptiveness. Investigators need to be experts in human behavior. They must know the right questions and the right amount of questions without coming up empty or overstepping their bounds. They have to know when an answer to their question is taking them down a dead end, whether purposefully or not. They also have to relentlessly pursue a path they believe will give them the answers they seek.

Patience. As good students of human nature, investigators must understand that interviewees possess contrasting communication abilities. Realizing miscommunication equals mischaracterization, investigators may need to restate questions to accommodate interviewees. Some interviewees may be naturally nervous under questioning. Some may be worried about repercussions of their truthful testimony. Some may be under extraordinary stress because of what they experienced. In any case, investigators must devote the needed time to allow the interviewee to express themselves as best they can. 

Restraint. Investigators walk a fine line in collecting facts that lead to the truth without necessarily asserting what is or what is not true. As Lieutenant Joe Brooks says, "Investigators are not the ones to drop the guillotine." This challenge is a critical one for investigators to meet; otherwise, the investigation will be perceived as biased. 

Objectivity. It would be a fatal mistake to enter an investigation with preconceived ideas about the subjects. This challenge amplifies when investigators have a relationship with a party to a case. "Assume nothing," says Lieutenant Brooks. "Don't even think about what you think." For this reason, investigators also need to know when to recuse themselves from an investigation. 

Fairness. "The more you dig in an investigation, the deeper it goes," says Paul Cassone. "It can go on for a long time." This is why investigators need to know when questions are still relevant or when they are going off course. For instance, if you were an investigator of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill of April 20, 2010, asking questions about the environmental conditions, equipment, materials, processes,  workers, management, and even regulators would be fair game. But asking questions about legislation regulating the oil industry may be too far from the root cause because all area oil wells were operating without a serious incident under the same regulations up until the date of the explosion.

Accuracy. The precision of the report language is essential. I am a strong believer in reporting verbatim, no matter how vulgar, abusive, or insensitive the statements are. The investigators are not the ones to judge whether language is appropriate for reporting purposes. Tell it like it was told.

Wisdom. A knowledge of policies and regulations alone won't do; investigators also must know what to do when a law is broken. As Lieutenant Brooks puts it, "If you're at a point when you believe a crime has been committed, you have to immediately refer the case to law enforcement authorities."

In my years of teaching investigation report writing, I have found numerous situations when investigative reports were unintentionally biased. Remember that words are nuanced, so edit carefully.  

The Resourceful Reporter, Part 3: Incident Reports

Incident reports are the second of nine descriptive reports appearing in this series. Employees write incident reports when a "reportable" event occurs. What is reportable depends on the industry and business, but the law greatly influences whether an incident report is necessary. For instance, issues of occupational health and safety (e.g., operator exposure to toxic fumes), environmental safety (e.g., a chemical fire outside the enclosed facility), and human misconduct (e.g., sexual harassment) are not only reportable but required by law. 

Incident reports can cover a wide range of issues, but they generally answer these questions:

• What happened?
• When did it end?
• Where did it happen?
• How did it happen?
• Who was involved?
• Was anyone injured?
• Was any equipment or property damaged? 
• What immediate actions were taken to end or mitigate the event?

The question of why the event happened may or may not be a reportable factor. For instance, it would make sense to describe why an electrical fire in the office pantry occurred to prevent its recurrence. On the other hand, if an employee punches another employee in the face during an argument, the why is unnecessary, because a physical assault is immediate grounds for termination, even for represented (union) employees, in many cases. 

Here are some pointers based on the most common questions I get about reporting: 

Rely on the conventions of your field. Incident reports vary by business. Police officers' arrest reports follow a different protocol from, say corporate investigators' case reports documenting employee misconduct, or healthcare counselors' incident reports describing accidents of service recipients. Do not reinvent the wheel; use the organizational incident report template.

Advocate for improvements. Just because your company template is standard throughout the organization does not mean it is etched in stone. If you see an opportunity for improvement, think it over. Once you are convinced you have a useful improvement, recommend it to management. Examples include something as small as allow more space on the form to describe the event, or more weighty items, such as separate contributing causes from the root cause or include a recommendation to management section. 

Maintain objectivity. Do not offer your opinion. If the accident was horrible, do not say so; just describe it precisely. Examples include a 5 mm-wide X 20 mm-long cut, not an awful gash; the operator walked away from the area, not the operator was grossly negligent; he gave contradictory statements and describe them, not he lied one way or another). Remember: this is a descriptive report, not an analytical one.