All Posts in Career Management

|In: Career Management|Last Updated:

So you say you wanna be a writer.

Maybe if you have a blog and want to make it more readable I could give you a few tips. But there’s too much luck involved in getting anything published on a paying basis. It’s sorta like wanting to be an actor: You can get parts in a local community theater, but that isn’t where the money is.

I misunderstood? You work in a job where you send a lot of emails, write the occasional report, and aren’t quite ready to ask an AI to do your writing for you? But when you’re done writing something you doze off mid-paragraph while proofreading it?

For this I can help.

Starting here: Don’t choose a writer you admire and attempt to mimic their style. A good writer’s style is a projection of their personality. Mimic your favorite writer and you’ll be trying to change your character.

Worse, your favorite writers are probably your favorites because they inject some entertainment into their writing. When you’re writing for a general audience that’s a good thing, so long as you don’t overdo it.

But when you’re writing for colleagues in a business setting, add entertainment and you risk making yourself the class clown. You might attract an appreciative audience in your place of work, but while your co-workers might enjoy your humor, those in a position to award you raises, promotions and bonuses won’t put you high on their lists because of it.

And so, when it comes to writing for your place of work, you’re best off keeping your humor to yourself, or, if you’re feeling the need, to a small circle of friends.

Then it’s time to get serious about what you have to say. And as is so often the case, getting serious starts with a plan. Like the one that follows. In it, you need to think about your audience, purpose, “meta-purpose,” actions needed by your audience, the document’s tone, and its grade. Just in case these aren’t too obvious to require additional explication:

Audience: Who are you writing this for? Who else are you writing it for? Who else might read it whether you want them to or not?

It’s unlikely that you have just one audience, and even if you do you can’t count on what you write not being propagated to others.

You need to know who you’re writing your document for so you can present your thoughts in ways that are as compatible as possible with how your audiences think.

One more bit about your audience: Avoid the “person from Mars” trap – the trap of assuming your audience has been living on Mars for the past 10 years and knows nothing about your subject, but also failing to provide context to someone who has been metaphorically living on Mars and needs it.

Purpose / Goal: What you hope to accomplish by writing the document. Start with the most global alternatives and then drill down a bit; the most likely global alternatives are either to inform or persuade.

If it’s to inform, ask yourself what you want your audience to be smarter about than they were when they started reading. “Who, what, when, where, why, and how” is a useful template.

If it’s to persuade, what do you figure they think about the subject now, and what would you like them to think about it when they’ve finished reading? And especially, what you would like them to do about it. Want a template? “Problem, solution, plan” is a useful framework.

“Meta” purpose: In addition to the “official” purpose, what else do you want to accomplish? For example, you might want to make your audience smarter about the challenges of processing OCR. You also might have a meta-purpose of wanting the recipients to think of you as a sophisticated and knowledgeable resource to call on when this level of expertise is needed. Or, it might be to get someone on your side of things if the subject is, say, politically contentious.

Action needed? What do you want your audience to do as a result of receiving this from you. If the answer is nothing, think hard about whether it’s a document you should send at all.

Tone: Given the audience, purpose, and action needed, will the document be more effective by being formal, or by being relaxed and casual?

Grade: Go through the document and score each paragraph as to its suitability given its audience, purpose, meta-purpose, and needed action; also whether it fits the tone you want to set.

Which leads to Bob’s last word: Don’t be an easy grader.

Comments

|In: Career Management|Last Updated:

Writers obsess about word choice.

No, that isn’t precisely true: Writers pay attention to word choice.

No again. That’s a generalization. “Writers” is too big a group to generalize from. It’s wordsmiths I’m writing about, and not all wordsmiths – just the best ones.

Word maestros choose words the way a cuisinier chooses spices.

Does this mean that if you aren’t a professional writer then it’s okay to rely on “thing” as a general-purpose noun, to be hauled out in place of the word that means what you’re trying to talk about?

In a word, no.

Nor is precision the only issue at stake when you decide how much you want to care if you’ve chosen the optimal term. How you say what you say affects you, just as much as it conveys meaning to those you’re speaking to.

There was, for example, the colleague who, in a conversation about office politics, referred to a mutual acquaintance as his “enemy.”

Enemy. Out of every word available to him in his lexicographic warehouse … opponent, adversary, rival, antagonist … he chose the most extreme item in his inventory.

So far as intentions are concerned, I’m confident my associate was merely too lazy to select a less extreme alternative. He wasn’t a bad person.

But we all know what the road to hell is paved with. And calling someone an enemy legitimizes forms of political weaponry more vicious and unsavory than what labeling them your “rival” would suggest are acceptable.

Calling them your enemy, that is, makes them deserve to be your victim.

In a business setting, if you hear anyone among your direct or indirect reports refer to anyone as their enemy, take the opportunity to school them in how inappropriate it is, not to mention organizationally damaging.

That’s different from hearing expressions of rivalry, something that can, pointed in a productive direction, be useful. Do too much to suppress feelings of rivalry and you’ll find that you’ve discouraged smart people from pointing out the flaws in unfortunate ideas, or from suggesting potentially superior alternatives.

Sure, I know you’re busy. And yes, I understand that attending to word choice slows you down.

But allow me to suggest a reframing that might change your attitude about such matters: Choosing the right superlative instead of mindlessly typing “g-r-e-a-t,” … or on the other end of the semantic continuum, finding a term of disparagement more potent than the ever-present “b-a-d” … can be fun.

I might almost suggest that as hobbies go, this one is outstanding.

Bob’s last word: In our national dialog (multilog?) I’ve read lots of opinion pieces that try to explain how it’s all become so toxic and what to do about it.

One I haven’t run across is lazy word choice.

Once upon a time, Grover Norquist famously introduced the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. It had an outsized impact on fiscal policy.

So in that vein, might I suggest some enterprising reader should create the Vocabulary Protection Pledge? Sample phrasing: “Whenever I’m speaking where anyone might hear, I will carefully choose only the most precise words when explaining my ideas.”

It might not stop Empty Green from blathering about Jewish Space Lasers, but as is the case with chicken soup to treat assorted maladies, it wouldn’t hurt.

And anyway, if Jews really did have space lasers, I know whose posterior would be first in line to get zapped.

Bob’s bragging rights: In case you missed the news last week, I’m proud to tell you my long-suffering CIO.com editor, Jason Snyder and I have been awarded a Silver Tabbie award from Trade Association Business Publications International, for my monthly feature, the CIO Survival Guide. Regarding the award, they say, “This blog scores highly for the consistent addressing of the readers’ challenges, backed by insightful examples and application to current events.“

Speaking of which, this week on the (ahem) award-winning CIO Survival Guide: “The CIO’s fatal flaw: Too much leadership, not enough management.” Its point: Compared to management, leadership is what has the mystique. But mystique isn’t what gets work out the door.

Comments