1

Luke Daniel

Professor

ENC 1102H

29 March 2017

A Rhetorical Analysis of Burgess Communication Engineering Standards: Implementing for

Effectiveness

My current research is focused on the subject of communication in the engineering

profession and how standards can create more efficient and effective communication between

engineers with goal of answering the question What are the optimal forms of engineering

standards for communication among engineers?. By analyzing this article I am looking to

understand what makes a standard useful for engineers, and what changes can be made to

improve them. The piece I will be analyzing in this rhetorical analysis is Communication

engineering standards: Implementing for effectiveness by G.J. Burgess, which covers the

effective implementation of engineering standards in a broad sense, and by doing so allows for

much of her advice to be applied outside of the engineering firms that she has experienced.

This article uses lists, and crafted scenarios to convey a methodology for introducing new

standards into a given project or workplace, while at the same time defining what a standard

should do, and what elements should be present within them in order to best fit this need through

the use of professional, and relatable anecdotes, and examples. The piece itself is only three

pages long with three main sections, and was published at the Professional Communication

Conference in November of 1991. In this piece Burgess seeks to answer two main topics, the

question of how to integrate a standard into a work environment, and why to use standards in the
 2

first place. These are presented through the use of theoretical situations that show what has been

most effective for the author, and simple, logical explanations respectively. The title of this piece,

Communication Engineering Standards: Implementing for Effectiveness implies that this will

be an article on the subject of methods of implementation of engineering standards that best

create communication between what can be assumed to be different engineers.

With over 23 years in the computer industry, Gloria J. Burgess has since become a public

speaker focusing on the topics of leadership, and communication within multiple industries, with

her main focus being on engineering, and computer science. Due to her experience as a manager,

instead of being a developer, or engineer herself, she may value aspects of standards, and

communication that are more beneficial for administrative roles, and less so for those most

affected by bringing in new standards. Though at the same time this helps to convey the

implementation side of standards more than my other sources do, which makes this piece more

useful, while at the same time she presents perspectives of those working with the standards.

Burgess is able to leverage this experience to communicate her thoughts in a way that is

appealing to both those in a manager position, as well as, anyone who may be looking for a way

to better use the tools provided to them. This is accomplished through phrasing such as, How

many times have you worked for a publication department where the basics such as the

publication specifications for content, format, layout, design-had to be revisited for each

assignment?, which creates a friendly tone that the intended audience should be able to relate to.

This article begins by defining what the general need for standards are, those being

consistency, predictability, and a common framework throughout the publication development

cycle. From there the author brings up a flaw with just suddenly adding a standard to an already

developing project, or professional group untrained with that standard through the use of a
 3

bulleted list. The main needs for a successful implementation of standards listed are the need, the

guidelines, the training, and continued use of the standard. Advice on what those in the

managerial role should do in order to facilitate these needs, with the focus being on clear

communication of why the standard should be used in the first place in order to ease the

transition away from what is already known. Then the idea of intertwining the work process of

the firm or publication team with that of the use of the standard would create a reliance on the

standard as it becomes part of everyday function.

Near the end of the piece there is also a brief analysis of what exactly can be defined as a

standard with One of the hallmarks of a standard that is both acceptable and usable is that it is

thought of not as a standard per se, but as a tool. Though only a small portion of this article

speaks on this subject it is actually the most important point. With this claim standards are

expanded beyond just rules that are being followed in order to speed up communication within a

community built upon these standards. As this statement applies this to the tools we use in

creating these communications by showing how a style guide or a template allows the writer to

quickly, and easily adhere to these rules.

In the last section of the article there is a short summary of what value there is to be

gained in implementing standards, by going through the challenges presented earlier, effectively

presenting the reason why we, as the reader, should use her methods.

This article makes use of pathos by using phrases that refer to the reader as a colleague or

otherwise familiar person as can be seen with phrases such as, For those of us who work in an

electronic publication environment, where Burgess assumes the experiences of the audience,

and through that can make a more personal connection with her intended audience. As mentioned

earlier there is also use of the authors own ethos by mentioning her previous positions, for
 4

example this segment from the abstract for this piece seen here, This paper presents a

practitioner's perspective of standards as engineered communication.

The author makes use of theoretical, but relatable scenarios as evidence for the claims

that are presented by the author in a way that makes them seem like they are trying to help the

reader, while throughout the piece she will take on the role of the assumed audience in order to

show how the standards work out in the real world. This piece does not present any of the

opposition to standards at all, and partially downplays the act of self-development of standards

by focusing solely on acquiring standards from IEEE.

Overall this article can be used to create a heuristic to evaluate the different sides of

engineering standards, by using the examples of what is important in a standard listed in the

article,and the analysis of what can be done with a weak standard in terms of these rules

presented within the article. There is also quite a lot that could be made from the examples of

non-traditional standards that are shown as they both show the importance of standards in

improving workflow, as well as, showing how more than just the literal standards need to be

analyzed, but also how the tools that manifest from the standards are effective in improving

communication. In my paper I will be able to use this article as a basis for creating my own

guidelines defining what are valuable components to look for within a standard. In turn this

guideline should be another tool that I can use to answer my research question of What are the

optimal forms of engineering standards for communication among engineers?

 5

Works Cited
1. G. J. Burgess, "Communication engineering standards:
Implementing for effectiveness," IPCC 91 Proceedings The Engineered
Communication, Aug. 2002.