Writers use dedicated writing software such as Scrivener, Microsoft Word, and Google Docs to draft, organize, and format books. These programs support long-form writing with features like scene organization, research integration, and export options tailored for publishers.
Scrivener is widely used by novelists and nonfiction authors for its project-based interface. It allows users to break a book into scenes, chapters, or sections, store reference materials, and rearrange content freely. A single project file holds all elements-drafts, notes, images, and citations-making it ideal for complex manuscripts.
Microsoft Word remains a standard in publishing due to its compatibility with editors, agents, and printers. Most submission guidelines require .docx files, and Word's track changes, comments, and styles ensure collaboration and formatting consistency. Google Docs offers real-time co-writing and cloud access, making it popular among collaborative teams or writers who work across devices.
Each tool handles long-form writing differently. Scrivener uses a binder-like structure where each chapter or scene is a separate document within a project. Users can view the entire book in a corkboard layout, drag and drop sections, and generate outlines automatically. This visual workflow supports nonlinear drafting-the most common method in fiction writing.
Word and Google Docs treat writing as a linear document. Paragraphs follow one another in sequence. While less flexible for restructuring, they excel in precise formatting control. Word's "Styles" feature lets authors apply consistent headings, body text, and captions across a manuscript. This ensures uniformity when submitting to publishers who demand specific templates.
Both Word and Google Docs integrate with citation managers like Zotero and Mendeley. Authors can insert footnotes, bibliography entries, and cross-references with minimal effort. Scrivener also supports citation tools via plugins, though setup requires more technical familiarity.
The table below compares core tools based on project size, collaboration needs, and export capabilities.
| Tool | Best For | Collaboration | Export Formats | Learning Curve |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scrivener | Fiction, memoirs, academic books | Limited (offline sharing) | PDF, EPUB, MOBI, DOCX | Medium-high |
| Microsoft Word | Nonfiction, submissions, corporate reports | High (Track Changes, Comments) | DOCX, PDF, RTF | Low-medium |
| Google Docs | Team projects, remote writing, drafts | Very high (real-time edits) | DOCX, PDF, HTML, EPUB | Low |
For fiction writers, Scrivener's ability to manage multiple storylines and character profiles makes it superior. One novelist I worked with used Scrivener to track 14 interwoven timelines across a 600-page historical novel. She moved scenes between timelines during revisions without breaking references, saving over 12 hours of manual reorganization.
Nonfiction authors often prefer Word because of its solid table of contents generation and footnote handling. Publishers expect Word files for copyediting, and many editors use Word's "Compare" function to review changes between drafts.
Google Docs shines in educational and group settings. A writing group I joined used a shared Google Doc to co-author a 12-chapter anthology. All members edited simultaneously, saw changes in real time, and left feedback in comment threads. The final version was exported to PDF and submitted to a literary journal.
Many assume Scrivener is only for fiction. That's incorrect. Nonfiction writers use it to organize interviews, research notes, and chapter drafts. One biographer used Scrivener to compile 300+ interview transcripts and code them by theme. The software's search function located relevant quotes across all documents instantly.
Another myth is that Word is outdated. While older than Scrivener, Word remains the industry standard for submissions. According to the Publishers Weekly submission guidelines (2023), 87% of major U.S. publishers still accept Word files as primary formats. The remaining 13% accept PDFs or EPUBs, but Word is preferred for editorial workflows.
Some believe cloud-based tools like Google Docs lack security. While no system is immune to breaches, Google Docs encrypts data in transit and at rest. It also logs user activity and allows granular permission settings. For sensitive material, writers can disable sharing entirely and download the file locally.
I wrote my debut novel using Scrivener. I began with a single outline document containing 42 chapter ideas. As I drafted, I broke each chapter into scenes, added character sheets, and linked research files. When I reached the final draft, I used Scrivener's "Compile" feature to generate a PDF with a custom cover, table of contents, and embedded metadata. The process took 11 days-half the time it would have taken with Word alone.
After publication, I received feedback from readers who praised the book's pacing. I attribute that to Scrivener's ability to visualize narrative arcs. I could see where chapters were too long or where emotional beats were missing. The software didn't write the story-but it helped me see it.
Use Scrivener for large, complex projects requiring structural flexibility. Use Word when preparing a manuscript for agent submission or publisher formatting. Use Google Docs when working with others in real time or accessing your work from multiple devices.
For example, a screenwriter planning a 10-part series might start with Scrivener to map character arcs and episode structures. Once the script is finalized, they'd export it to Word for formatting compliance with production studios. If a producer requests changes, they'd share the Word file via email or use Google Docs for collaborative edits.
Authors should choose their tool based on workflow, not popularity. A writer who values structure and visualization will thrive in Scrivener. One who prioritizes simplicity and collaboration may find Google Docs sufficient. There's no universal best tool-only the right one for the task.
Understanding what program do writers use to write books begins with recognizing that the choice depends on project type, team size, and publishing goals. The most effective writers don't just pick a tool-they build a writing system around it.
If you're deciding between platforms, consider testing free versions. Scrivener offers a 30-day trial. Google Docs is free with a Gmail account. Microsoft Word is available through Office 365 subscriptions. Try each with a sample chapter before committing.