No.7 (Or is it Series 2 No.1?) - Take Responsibility for Your Message
Andy Mitchell
Chartered Environmentalist | Chartered Town Planner I IEMA Fellow | Registered EIA Practitioner
After much deliberation I decided to reinvigorate this series of EIA shorts with a topic that's very much front of mind for me as we plan our approach to consultation for a new major energy project. As if to highlight the very point, I couldn't decide if this was No.7 in the series, or Series 2 No.1. This, my friends, goes to the very heart of my point...
Think on this, and be honest. How often have you quietly rolled your eyes as you realise a regulator has completely missed what you meant, a stakeholder has misinterpreted your message, or a concerned neighbour to a project has panicked through misunderstanding? I do it more than I care to admit. I'm both a) an roller of eyes and b) an average communicator at best.
But as communicators nonetheless, WE must craft our narrative. It needs a beginning, a middle, and an end (sort of). We are storytelling.
Of course I don't mean fiction. I'd never suggest such a thing. Or admit it.
Storytelling is a craft and an art. And at its heart is a responsibility on the teller to be clear, to make sense, to use a structure if one is needed, to guide the listener to hear and intuitively "get" what they're being told. Maybe through a traditional approach we all recognise (used often), or more creatively using alternative forms of media (used sometimes), cutting edge technology (used much more in a post-Covid world), or through the interpretive medium of modern dance (thankfully not widely adopted yet).
领英推荐
Maybe your structure is pre-defined, to a point. Of course you'll be reprimanded by the grumpy EIA PM if you deviate from their beloved template and plain English style guide. But your prose isn't limited. Your narrative isn't limited. Your use of language isn't completely limited. Or else it shouldn't be.
As communicators of project-critical detail we MUST be understood. That is our job and it's also our duty.
So a very simple observation from me to restart this series...or kick off the new one...take responsibility for your message and don't be afraid to get creative if it helps.
As EIA practitioners our words are just as much our craft as our technical expertise is. We are Competent Experts. But we are also storytellers. And it's not the reader's responsibility to understand us. It's our responsibility to be understood.
You get me?
Marine and Coastal Environmental Manager ?? Writing about sustainable coasts ??
1 年Great article, clear communication through writing is definitely a skill that should be constantly developed. Need another short!!
Environmental planning specialist
2 年Inception meeting, point 3 on the agenda (after 'Introductions' and the obvious 'Budget and Programme') should be Project Messaging - what are the core themes for this project and how are we addressing them. If we do not know the latter, what do we need to do to close this out. Nailing that early on and your presentation (and 'their' comprehension) of the scheme, assessment of alternatives, impact assessment and mitigation becomes so much easier.
Retired
2 年Your commentary is spot on. Technical communication can be boring because it is difficult to understand. The EIA chapter whatever topic, should be understandable to the general public not just to the technical expert. In my experience in managing over 60 EIAs, it is often the structuring of the reporting that causes difficulties in understanding the topic. Too many matters in an illogical order; too many long sentences (40 or more words long!); too much jargon without explanation. My advice - keep it simple by making sentences short. An average sentence length of no more than 15 words per page is the aim. It will transform any EIA chapter's communication. Try it and read the difference.
Head of Planning Law | Brodies LLP | Consenting | Property Development | Renewables
2 年Food for thought. From my legal review work, I've certainly found some chapters easier to understand than others. For readers, it's the "why should I be bothered?" test - there's useful information, but what are the key conclusions you want the reader to take away? Those key conclusions can get lost in the sheer amount of words to read. Also, it feels that the chapters end up being too detailed/ long for many lay people, and therefore only benefit the expert audience, who ironically know a lot of what's being mentioned anyway.
Technical Director at Mott MacDonald
2 年Spot on there. EIA is more difficult than most for this as we don't know who of the many stakeholders the reader is. Tailoring text for a single reader is relatively easy (although not universally well done), ensuring its clear and correctly understood by all is certainly a skill.