Lean Communication: User-friendly language – Part 1

Why does the New York Times write at a 10^th grade reading level when the majority of its readers are college graduates and 80% have at least some college?[1] Because simple sells. By keeping it simple, they capture less educated readers without losing the higher levels.

You should do the same when you speak or write. You probably work with people who have at least a college degree, so you might think you could get away with speaking to their education level, but think about what that means. Every time they listen to you, they have to exert the highest level of effort of which they are capable. It gets tiring, and people simply don’t want to make the effort, at least not all the time. Everyone wants to get the information they need without having to work too hard.

We make people work too hard to understand us when we use any one of these three forms of language:

• Smoke
• Fog
• Friction

In this and the next two articles, let’s examine each of these and figure out what to about them.

Smoke

Smoke is language that’s deliberately puffed up to try to make us sound more intelligent or our topic more important.

When talking to others, there’s a sweet spot for word choice. Make it too simple and people get bored or feel like they’re being talked-down to. Make it too complicated and people misunderstand or check out. Most of us fit comfortably in that middle ground when we talk to our friends and work peers. But something seems to happen when we address a group, or someone we are trying to impress. We switch to more formal and even pretentious language, probably because we think it elevates us our subject matter in their estimation.

That’s why we say “Please extinguish illumination before vacating the premises,” instead of “Turn out the lights when you leave.” In one study, 86% of Stanford undergraduates admitted that they tried to make their papers more complex to appear more intelligent—and I think the other 14% were lying.

But inflating your language to make yourself appear smarter is wrong for two reasons. The first reason is obvious but might not convince you: if you make yourself look smarter but your listeners can’t understand you, you have not added any value. You’ve put your goals ahead of your listeners’ needs.

The second reason is somewhat surprising, and should convince you. Despite the old saying many people will conclude that where there’s smoke, there’s no fire! According to the same study that asked the Stanford undergrads about their writing, bigger words actually make others judge you less favorably. Why would that be? There could be a couple of reasons. First, it’s human nature: if they don’t understand what you’re saying, they can either conclude that you are smarter than they are, or you don’t know what you’re talking about. Which do you think is more likely to happen? Also, if you’re speaking with people who know what you sound like in real life, you will come across as fake, or like you’re hiding something.

How to Pop the Pretentious Bubble

The best way to impress others with your intelligence is to make your points clearly, and familiar words are your best tools for the purpose. Good writers have known this for a long time. As Churchill said, “Broadly speaking, the short words are the best, and the old words best of all.”

Big, unfamiliar words are not necessarily bad; sometimes you need a special word to be precise about meaning or a certain nuance. If you’re speaking with an audience that is as clued-in to the topic as you are, let them fly. With economists, for example, it’s OK—even advisable—to say disintermediation instead of cutting out the middleman. But big words are bad when they are used to try to impress, rather than to express.

Smoke is the easiest of the clarity problems to avoid. First, be yourself and be conversational, even when you’re giving a formal presentation. Imagine that you are talking to a good friend over a beer. Second, know your audience, to know what they know. If you have to use an unfamiliar term, define it the first time you use it, and give an example.

Next: Clear the FOG

[1] http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/section-4-demographics-and-political-views-of-news-audiences/

[1] http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/newsletter/plwork15.htm