Why Words Matter

This weekend I will be reading “To Be Clear: A Style Guide for Business Writing” by British journalist Philip Collins. The publication of this book had passed me by until I read a piece in the Guardian by Adrian Chiles introducing it. In it, he recalled his days as a budding business reporter and feeling bewildered by much of the language being used around him. This article spoke right to the heart of the challenge and opportunity we experience daily in comms roles, and my personal obsession with language being used to exclude. The words we choose really do matter.

I’ve written before on my much-neglected blog about language in business. About the overuse of ‘absolutely’ instead of a simple yes/no. How sporting idioms rarely transcend cultural boundaries. And how our obsession with big words that lack simplicity and clarity mostly leaves readers, listeners, or those on the end of a sales cold call none the wiser. (Sidenote - did you know there is a long word to describe a long word. In case you’re wondering, it’s sesquipedalian.)

As communications professionals, we have a duty to call ‘bullsh*t’ when our business and bosses aren’t communicating clearly. Often this is easier said than done. Language can be incredibly personal to the person writing or speaking it, and many people will have either no-go phrases or much-repeated ones. Working in a global role, I find the need for simple language even more critical. Yesterday I was rightly challenged by my American colleagues about a job description I’d written that referenced the role being ‘at the coalface of the company’. It took me far too long to explain to them what I meant by that phrase and even longer to think of an alternative I could use. I got there eventually and blame a combination of tiredness and mild indignation that this phrase isn’t universal. As a colleague often reminds me – we’re two nations divided by a common language.

Where I see language at its worst is in so-called ‘thought leadership’. Huge disclaimer here. I despise the phrase thought leadership. In its truest form thought leaders are incredible – brilliant thinkers, true experts in their field, and a recognised authority on a subject. Sadly, the meaning has become so bastardized that it now seems ok for anyone with a vague opinion created for them by a PR person to call themselves a thought leader. I digress. My point is that in the absence of real opinions, real insight, and real expertise ‘thought leaders’ navigate their credibility gap by using prose that makes the simple utterly complex.

Some of the best thought leaders in history understood the power of simplicity - using language to inspire, rally people behind a cause, and democratize a message. It’s easy to think about speeches from Churchill and JFK here. Still, there are just as many modern-day examples of amazing people who do this just as well, and maybe better. A few of my favourites are New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, physicist Professor Brian Cox, and author Matthew Syed.

At Lenovo, we talk about what we write passing the ‘Lily Test’ - Lily was the receptionist at our US headquarters in Raleigh (North Carolina) for many years. You might be able to write the most amazing sesquipedalian memos and speeches, but if Lily doesn’t understand what you’re trying to say, then you’ve failed. We talk about the critical need for inclusion in so many areas of life, yet language seems to be forgotten and sadly has the power to exclude like almost nothing else.

Sarah Ogden , one of my favourite people in comms, sent me this recently from Simon Sinek : “Communication is not about saying what we think. Communication is about ensuring others hear what we mean”. Wise words indeed. And as Adrian Chiles concluded in his Guardian piece, “It’s a brave and brilliant person who dares to use only the simplest language possible to make themselves clear.”

Here’s to everyone in comms being more brave and brilliant.?