Enough already | Pompous business writing reflects poorly on the author and fools no one
Advice Squad is written by members of the Maine chapter of the Association for Consulting Expertise, a trade organization of 88 consultants around the state. This issue’s column is written by Dave Griffiths, owner of writing and media relations firm Dave Griffiths Communications in Mechanic Falls.
Management speak: “Our business is going through a paradigm shift.”
Translation: “We have no idea what we’ve been doing, but in the future we shall do something completely different.” — Anonymous Internet wag
On occasion, I identify myself as a “communications consultant,” although I’ve been doing that less and less, preferring the more straightforward “trainer” (business writing, presentation skills and media relations). To me, the word “consultant” far too often equates with long meetings, dark suits and websites stuffed with phrases such as “paradigm shift.”
It occurred to me some time ago that people who fancy themselves consultants are — deliberately or otherwise — using our mother tongue to exclude, when English can be a marvelous tool for including our readers in what we have to say. Have a look at this enticing paragraph from a management consulting site:
“Projects are customized based on client needs. Due diligence services range from initial validation of targets to detailed on-site due diligence visits to the preparation of complete integration plans. Management consulting services, aimed at enhancing organizational effectiveness, are typically intensive studies that identify cost-saving opportunities and define appropriate actionable go-forward plans. Strict confidentiality is maintained for all engagements.”
Really? That’s what you want me to pay for? My reaction:
Where do I find the actual content you’ve so cleverly hidden behind mindless copycat phrases such as “due diligence?” Does deploying it twice in the same sentence mean you’re doubly due diligent?
“…initial validation of targets”? What targets?
Thank you for offering a “complete” integration plan. After all, so many other websites candidly warn me that their work is often incomplete.
You’re going to “define appropriate actionable go-forward plans”? Yes, I hope they’re “appropriate.” In these tough times, I’d rather not spend my money on anything inappropriate. And the “actionable” part is particularly reassuring. I certainly don’t want a consultant who tells me to fold my business because I have absolutely no options, or offers a plan that looks good on paper but would be a loser in the real world. Thank you also for inventing words like “actionable.” The language is so much richer as a result.
Defining your hoped-for plans as “go-forward” is just the sort of precision that makes me want to reach right out and hire you. It makes my choices so much clearer if I know that actually going back in time or staying right where I am in some sort of other-dimensional stasis won’t be included in your sage advice.
Finally, your writing tells me that you’d be equally pompous, obtuse, unimaginative and just plain dull sitting across from me at a shiny conference table.
I’m also seeing a word that ranks right down there with “due diligence” when it comes to shallow and rather stupid communicating. See if you can find it in this phrase from another website: “… to help formulate and deploy their business strategies and bring about transformational change to produce successful results.”
Yes, of course it’s “transformational,” isn’t it? Do you know of any other kind of change?
It reminds me of Jim Baker standing up right at the beginning of the protracted dispute over the 2000 presidential election results and telling us the Bush side of the recount would be “transparent.” Ask yourself how many times you’ve heard that one. Then ask yourself how many times you’ve heard promises to be “opaque” in similarly sensitive investigations or analyses.
A few others:
You can’t be the “most unique.” Unique is one of a kind. Making that distinction is the type of thing that separates mouth-breathing scribblers from professional communicators who treat their readers with respect.
“Our failure to fabricate even one paper clip that actually holds two sheets of paper together is negatively impacting our sales performance.” First of all, “impact” became a verb only about 30 years ago, even though the verbs “affect” or “influence” did the job quite nicely. But now that it’s here, why compound the damage by adding an awkward adverb? Why not rely instead on unambiguous, active, space-saving standbys such as “harm” or “hurt?”
“Outside the box.” I thought this sucker would be gone by now. If you’re really thinking outside the box, should you be using tired phrases like “outside the box?”
And finally:
Management: “We have to leverage our resources.”
Translation: “We’re working weekends.”
Dave Griffiths can be reached at dave@davegriffithscommunications.com. Read more Advice Squad here.
Most Recent
Most Recent
Comments