Bad language

What is the most important tool we have for clear communication? If you’ve read my other posts you might think the answer is EMOTION or EYE CONTACT or NARRATIVE. But actually the answer is words.

We use words to communicate. (I’m doing it right now.) And using words well is one of the best ways to make ourselves more effective communicators. Yet somehow when we get into a professional context, we suddenly forget how to use language. We start using words to obfuscate instead of communicate.

Here are some basic things to avoid. 

Words With Unclear Meaning

Everyone makes fun of corporate buzzwords. But there is actually nothing wrong with the word “synergy.” Synergy is a great word! It sounds cool, and it has almost no synonyms. It’s unique and powerful.

The problem is that no one knows what it means.

If you don’t know what a word means, then stop using it. You don’t even have to look it up! Your vocabulary is big enough already. Go to your grave without learning what “synergy” means.

But let’s say you do know what synergy means. You looked it up, even though I told you not to. You should still probably use another word, unless you want to share the definition with your audience. Because they don’t know what it means. 

Ironically, words that are overused are the ones that most often lose their meaning. Check to see what words you use the most often. Are you using them because they’re the right word, or because it’s an easy filler word?

Are you using complicated multisyllabic words when a simpler word would do? Using buzzwords to make your ideas sound important has the opposite effect. Avoid!

Words that Mean the Opposite of What They Seem to Mean

I say collaborate, but what I mean is I would like you to do this work for me.

I say that we need to partner with our customer, but what I mean is we need to sell them something.

I say that we met some challenges, but what I mean is that we made some mistakes.

This is not just an issue of communication, it’s an issue of integrity and respect. If you’re using euphemisms that intentionally obfuscate meaning, ask yourself: am I doing or saying something that I’m ashamed of.

Am I trying to take credit for someone else’s work? Do I believe that my product has no value? Do I think we make stupid mistakes because we’re bad at our jobs?

In most cases, the answers to these questions are no, no, and no. We use these euphemisms not because we’re trying to hide that we’re doing something wrong, but because we’re trying to be nice. We have somehow convinced ourselves that other people can’t handle the reality of our message.

Being nice and being respectful are often in direct opposition to each other—more often than we’d like to admit. Being nice doesn’t really have anything to do with how we treat other people. Being nice is about is how we would like to be seen.

Consider that it might be more respectful to speak to someone in clear language that describes what’s really going on. They might not like what we have to say, and they might even have an emotional reaction to it. They could tell us that they’re unhappy about this in a variety of ways that might be hard to take in the moment.

But it’s better to face up to a difficult conversation than avoid it with unclear communication. At some point, we will have to deal with the real situation anyway.

Dehumanizing Language

Stop using the word “resources” to refer to people. The same goes for “hires,” which should stay a verb and not a noun. Also, “diverse” is not an adjective to describe a person. Groups can be diverse, but people are Vietnamese, African-American, blind, deaf, and transgender. 

Talking about “diverse hires” or “managing resources” is a way to distance ourselves from the difficult job of dealing with real people who have complex lives and histories.

Compare these two descriptions: 

We don’t have budget to add a new hire. In fact, if we miss our targets again next quarter, we will contract our resources. We need to put more pressure on the department to deliver against our goals.

We don’t have budget to hire someone new. In fact, if the company doesn’t make enough revenue next quarter, we will have to reduce the size of the team. We need to ask people to find ways to be more effective at reaching the goals we set.

These descriptions are very similar. Both use professional language, and both describe the same painful situation. But by trying to talk around the painful situation, the first description actually makes it sound worse—while simultaneously being less clear. The second description could be even more clear by saying “someone will get fired” or “people have to do better at their jobs” but we can use humanizing language without being confrontational. 

When we use language that dehumanizes other people, it often has the added problem of removing our humanity from the situation as well. People use dehumanizing language when they want to avoid taking responsibility for their own participation.

This gets even more important when we start talking about our customers—even in our internal discussions, the conversations our customers never hear. When we talk about our customers as people, it changes the way we think about them. We are more likely to identify with them and see things from their perspective.