Blog

If you are looking for any business-writing course, UK specialists Emphasis can almost certainly help you.

Posts Tagged ‘Jargon’

Dangerous jargon

Posted by Catie Holdridge

Jargon can bring clarity for experts and irritation for laypeople, but could it sometimes be life threatening? Yes, according to the coroner heading up the inquest into the London terrorist attacks of 7 July 2005, Lady Justice Hallett.

Simple impatience with unclear terms is a more serious problem when it comes to understanding the situation at the scene of an emergency, she asserted on the last day of evidence-giving at the 7/7 hearing.

Is it really worth the time it takes to refer to a ‘conference demountable unit from a management centre’, rather than a ‘portable incident room’, for example?

And obscure job titles could confuse and disguise people’s roles, she pointed out. ‘I don’t know whether a crew manager is somebody who is responsible for supplies or is used to fighting fires. I have no idea,’ she said.

Jargon has a long history of naysayers, but Lady Justice Hallett’s criticism touched on the most fundamental practicality of appropriate language. ‘This isn’t just somebody being pedantic about the use of English … when it comes to managing incidents, people don’t understand what the other person is.’

The campaign to ban the bull

Posted by Catie Holdridge

In our e-bulletin, we like to take a wild specimen of business-writing bull by the horns and tame it, so that it can be understood by all.

The Ban the bull campaign was inspired by our gobbledygook amnesty back in 2009, which brought us the following offending sentence.

And, despite the subject matter, there’s nothing natural about this sentence …

“In respect of a natural habitat, the sum of the influences acting on a natural habitat and its typical species that may affect its long-term natural distribution, structure and functions as well as the long-term survival of its typical species within, as the case may be, the European territory of the Member States to which the Treaty applies or the territory of a Member State or the natural range of that habitat.”

This 72-word monster is more likely to leave you dizzy than well-informed about natural habitats, assuming you even make it to the end. Sentences that have to be re-read numerous times are only going to annoy your reader, and could well make them put your document aside – permanently.

This sentence has actually been doing the rounds – in several slightly modified forms – in assorted EC Directives and national regulations for over a decade. (It speaks to the dangers of repeatedly using cut-and-paste, that this example is perhaps the worst.) Where it was previously broken up into numbered points, these have now been crammed together, with additional phrases haphazardly piled onto the end.

So how might we re-build this into something more manageable?

Start plainly

Even bearing in mind that this is taken out of context, the opening is vague and unclear. In what sense is it ‘in respect of’? It would be best to make this obvious at the beginning, so the reader is prepared with a premise to add the rest of the information to as they go on.

After a little research, it seems this is probably defining an official way of deciding the conservation status of any natural habitat. Would the reader have known that?

This would be better: ‘The conservation status of a natural habitat can be measured by looking at …’

Punctuate

Avoid such overly long, opaque constructions, typical of the language of legislation. Even when lacking in individually mystifying jargon words – as this one mostly is – the sheer length of such sentences is a huge obstacle to clarity. Effective use of punctuation is vital for making meaning explicit, so use it wisely: an infinite number of commas won’t clarify a poorly put-together sentence.

Break it up

When you’re dealing with a list in your text – in this case, a list of factors – consider using bullet points. These instantly make the piece more accessible, because the reader is no longer faced with a block of text. They also help to make separate ideas more distinct.

Cut the filler

Phrases like ‘as the case may be’ sound rambling and wishy-washy. Better to actually state your case, and cut these out.

Keep it simple

Unless you’re sure every reader will understand a particular word, pick a more straightforward one.

So that would leave us with:

The conservation status of a natural habitat can be measured by looking at:
•    every influence, both environmental and human, that affects that habitat and the species within it
•    how these influences will affect that habitat’s long-term distribution, structure and function; and on the future survival of its typical species.
In this context, these definitions apply to the range of natural habitats within Member States of the European territory included in this Treaty.

Now, armed with this knowledge, we can all move forward into a world where business writing is safer for everyone.

If you ever spot any baffling business-speak, be it in a report, letter, email, flyer, website, or proposal, please join our campaign by sending it to us to unravel. Alternatively, just leave a comment here at our business writing blog.

Words that carry weight

Posted by Catie Holdridge

The words ‘obese’ and ‘obesity’ may soon be off-limits at Liverpool City Council. The idea is to avoid causing offence, but will they just end up diluting the message?

The proposal, if it goes ahead, would see these words replaced by the term ‘unhealthy weight’ in any literature aimed at children. The idea came from around 90 nine to eleven year-olds of the Liverpool Schools’ Parliament, who see using ‘obese’ as too negative, and potentially disheartening for the young people it may describe.

It’s often a good move to swap more clinical or jargon-like words for everyday alternatives which are more accessible to your audience, but sometimes you risk losing the full meaning behind the original choice. Some see this as a worrying move: clinically, being obese is much more serious than merely being overweight. This substitution is ‘just fudging the problem’ says Tam Fry, of the Child Growth Foundation. ‘Unfortunately sometimes schoolchildren have to be taught the realities of life.’

Let us know what you think. Is this a sensible plan to protect children, or just too PC?

Is it a feathered sky-dwelling nest-builder? Is it an aerodynamic pan-destinational person carrier? No, it’s Sloganizer!

Posted by Catie Holdridge

Are you struggling to come up with a new nugget of corporate gobbledegook? Could your report benefit from some indecipherable doublespeak? Are you floundering from a lack of filler? Never fear. Sloganizer to the rescue!

The new application for the iPhone brings the old paper Sloganizer right up-to-date – and right into your office.

When it became obvious in the 1970s that ambiguous nonsense was the latest staple of boardrooms around Britain, Sloganizer was born. In its first incarnation, it was made of paper and offered up to 1000 random three-part combinations of meaningless business lingo, such as ‘decentralization of participative ambiguity’.

The latest downloadable version will reveal up to 375,000 internally interchangeable – and utterly incomprehensible – phrases with a simple shake of your iPhone. Some highlights include:

Multi-disciplinary bureaucratic strategy determination
Integral prognosis of fields of tension
Functional conservative alternative behaviour.

While the last one might well refer to David Cameron’s conduct and policies as he tries to elbow Gordon Brown out of the PM spot, we can guarantee that 99 per cent of the slogans will mean absolutely nothing. This is the jargon jackpot.

Please note: Emphasis and the makers of Sloganizer bear no responsibility for any loss of time, money or respect while using this product.

Councils ban jargon – but have they missed the mark?

Posted by Catie Holdridge

Council leaders have banned some 200 examples of the worst management jargon. But there are signs they’ve fallen into the lazy-writing trap themselves.

A press release from the Local Government Association published today says that words such as ‘slippage’ (meaning delay), ‘benchmark’ (measure) and ‘procure’ (buy) are all out. So are management clichés like ‘thinking outside the box’.

Many of the old favourites, like ‘blue-sky thinking’, ‘paradigm’ and ‘synergy’ are on the banned list. But so are some real howlers that we’ve never heard of, such as ‘predictors of beaconicity’ (eh?).

We’ve long argued that such terms and phrases are a barrier to clear communication (see here, here and here). They’re also a sign of lazy thinking. Using words like ‘functionality’ and ‘rebaselining’ (yes, really) are a sure sign that the author isn’t taking time to consider what they really want to say (let alone thinking about the poor reader).

Words and phrases like these are also a great hiding place for someone who doesn’t want to say anything that might rock the boat, as we reported here last week.

But there are some signs of laziness among the LGA themselves. Take a look at the list below and you might wonder about the suitability of some of the alternatives they offer. ‘Money’ is not really a substitute for ‘funding streams’ for example (the latter being much more specific).

Simply implying that ‘cascading’ is redundant without giving an alternative suggests the list was compiled by a public-relations hack with no understanding of management. And erroneously suggesting adjectives like ‘healthy’ as direct alternatives for nouns like ‘wellbeing’ may give serial offenders an excuse to dismiss the list as badly thought out.

Don’t get me wrong. I hate the way many managers stuff their reports full of meaningless pap. Indeed, we spend our working lives weaning them off their thesaurus dependency. But jargon isn’t always the bogeyman.

Good writing is about a lot more than simply avoiding jargon. Although using the LGA’s list, with a few exceptions, is a good start.

The LGA’s list of 200 words and their ‘alternatives’


Across-the-piece – everyone working together
Actioned – do
Advocate – support
Agencies – groups
Ambassador – leader
Area based – in an area
Area focused – concentrating on the area
Autonomous – independent
Baseline – starting point
Beacon – leading light
Benchmarking – measuring
Best Practice – best way
Blue sky thinking – thinking up ideas
Bottom-Up – listening to people
CAAs – why use at all?
Can do culture  – get the job done
Capabilities -
Capacity – ability
Capacity building – enough room in the system
Cascading -  why use at all?
Cautiously welcome – devil in the detail
Challenge – problem
Champion – best
Citizen empowerment ­– people power
Client – person
Cohesive communities – why use at all?
Cohesiveness – together
Collaboration – working together
Commissioning – buy
Community engagement – getting people involved
Compact – why use at all?
Conditionality ­­- why use at all?
Consensual  – everyone agrees
Contestability – Why use at all?
Contextual – background
Core developments – main things that are happening
Core Message ­– main point
Core principles – beliefs
Core Value – belief
Coterminosity – all singing from the same hymn sheet
Coterminous – all singing from the same hymn sheet
Cross-cutting – everyone working together
Cross-fertilisation – spreading ideas
Customer – people/person
Democratic legitimacy – voted in
Democratic mandate – elected to put people first
Dialogue – talk/discuss
Direction of travel – way forward
Distorts spending priorities – ignores people’s needs
Double devolution – Why use at all?
Downstream – Why use at all?
Early Win – success
Edge-fit – Why use at all?
Embedded – set in
Empowerment – people power
Enabler – helps
Engagement – working with people
Engaging users ­– getting people involved
Enhance – improve
Evidence Base – research shows
Exemplar – example
External challenge – outside pressures
Facilitate – help
Fast-Track – speed up
Flex – Why use at all?
Flexibilities and Freedoms  – more power to do the right thing
Framework – guide
Fulcrum – pivot
Functionality – use
Funding Streams – money
Gateway review – Why use at all?
Going forward – in the future
Good Practice – best way
Governance – Why use at all?
Guidelines – guide
Holistic – taken in the round
Holistic governance – Why use at all?
Horizon scanning – Why use at all?
Improvement levers – using the tools to get the job done
Incentivising – incentive
Income Streams – money/cash
Indicators – measurements
Initiative – idea
Innovative capacity – Why use at all?
Inspectorates – monitoring bodies
Interdepartmental – working together
Interface – talking to each other
Iteration – version
Joined up – working together
Joint working – working together
LAAs – Why use at all?
Level playing field – everyone equal
Lever – Why use at all?
Leverage – influence
Localities ­– places/town/city/village
Lowlights – worst bits
MAAs  – Why use at all?
Mainstreaming – Why use at all?
Management capacity – Why use at all?
Meaningful consultation– talking to people
Meaningful dialogue – talking to people
Mechanisms – methods
Menu of Options – choices
Multi-agency ­– many groups
Multidisciplinary – many
Municipalities – towns/cities/areas
Network model – Why use at all?
Normalising – make normal
Outcomes – results
Outcomes – focused
Output – results
Outsourced – privatised
Overarching – Why use at all?
Paradigm – Why use at all?
Parameter – limits
Participatory – joining in
Partnership working – working together
Partnerships – working together
Pathfinder – Why use at all?
Peer challenge – Why use at all?
Performance Network – Why use at all?
Place shaping – creating places where people can thrive
Pooled budgets – money
Pooled resources – time and money
Pooled risk – Why use at all?
Populace – people
Potentialities – chances
Practitioners – experts
Predictors of Beaconicity – Why use at all?
Preventative services – protecting the most vulnerable
Prioritization – most important
Priority – most important
Proactive – Why use at all?
Process driven – shouldn’t everything be people driven?
Procure – buy
Procurement – buying
Promulgate – spread
Proportionality -  in proportion
Protocol – guidance
Provider vehicles – Why use at all?
Quantum – Why use at all?
Quick Hit – success
Quick Win – success
Rationalisation – cut
Rebaselining – Why use at all?
Reconfigured – reform
Resource allocation – money going to the right place
Revenue Streams  – money
Risk based – safest way
Robust – tough
Scaled-back – cut/reduce
Scoping – work out
Sector wise – Why use at all?
Seedbed – idea
Self-aggrandizement – Why use at all?
Service users – people
Shared priority ­– all working together
Shell developments – Why use at all?
Signpost – point in the direction of
Single conversations – talking to
Single Point of Contact – everything under one roof
Situational – situation
Slippage – delay
Social contracts ­ – deal
Social exclusion – poverty
Spatial – Why use at all?
Stakeholder – other organisations
Step Change – improve
Strategic -  planned
Strategic priorities – planned
Streamlined – efficient
Sub-regional – work between councils
Subsidiarity – Why use at all?
Sustainable – long term
Sustainable communities – environmentally friendly
Symposium ­­– meeting
Synergies – what use at all?
Systematics – Why use at all?
Taxonomy – Why use at all?
Tested for Soundness ­– what works
Thematic – theme
Thinking outside of the box – Why use at all?
Third sector – charities and voluntary organisations
Toolkit – guidance
Top-Down – ignores people
Trajectory – route
Tranche – slice
Transactional – Why use at all?
Transformational – change
Transparency – clear
Upstream – Why use at all?
Upward trend – getting better
Utilise – use
Value-added – extra
Vision ­– ideal/dream/belief
Visionary – ideal/dream/belief
Welcome – necessary and needed/step in the right direction
Wellbeing – healthy
Worklessness – unemployed

Microsoft to improve ‘buying experience at retail’. (That’s ‘shopping’ to you and me.)

Posted by Rob Ashton

Microsoft has announced it’s to open its own shops, in a clear bid to grab a slice of the Apple retail action.

Apple trades on its image as the quintessence of cool: all innovative design and sleek lines. Microsoft may face an uphill battle in this respect, at least if its press release announcing the move is anything to go by.

It quotes Kevin Turner, Microsoft’s chief operating officer, as saying:

We’re working hard to transform the PC and Microsoft buying experience at retail by improving the articulation and demonstration of the Microsoft innovation and value proposition so that it’s clear, simple and straightforward for consumers everywhere.

‘What?’ you may ask. Good question.

I was going to offer a translation, but I’m afraid it’s stumped me. Some ‘clear, simple and straightforward’ language might be a good start, Mr Turner.