Write It Right - Keep It Simple!

Michelle of our communications team this month focuses on eliminating obfuscating buzzwords from everyday conversations. She probably wouldn't approve of my use of the word obfuscating, as she might feel it unnecessarily confuses things, but oh well... So in the spirit of KISS - keep it simple... - here goes:

When in doubt, just use plain English!

It happens every few years: A new set of business "buzzwords" starts cropping up in meetings, emails and everyday conversations. Here are some that simply need to go.

1."Capitalizing": This can mean "make money from," "make the most of" or a number of things. Be specific instead of relying on the buzzword.

2."Deploy": Even if the project seems important, it's probably not equal to sending troops into battle. "Start" or "begin using" work just fine.

3."In brief": Keeping things concise is great! So, why not eliminate these two unnecessary words as well?

4."Mission critical": See #2. Unless you work at the Pentagon or NASA, this is fairly pretentious. "Important" works well, or simply "critical" if the situation seems dire.

5."On the same page": But heavens, what if we’re on different paragraphs? Seriously, just use “agree.”

6."Ramp up": "Increase." Enough said.

7."Spearheaded": See #2 and #4. "Led" will usually work just fine.

8."Streamline": Does this mean to make something "faster," "simpler," "easier to use" or many others? Again, be specific — and use plain English.

9."Think outside the box": Ironically, using this hackneyed phrase is the opposite of original thinking. Instead, just ask for some "fresh ideas."

10."Utilize": Please, just use "use."

Thanks Michelle for some great tips. On a similar vein, the Harvard Business Review recently had an interesting blog about eliminating meaningless words that you also might want to check out.

And finally, from a piece attributed to one of the masters of the written word - Mark Twain (though there is some debate as to whether he actually penned these words himself) - I'll leave you with his plan for improving the English language...

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

Generally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeiniing voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x"— bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez —tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivili.

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.