Recently, Eric Chandler and I wrote a blog post called “Social Media Crisis” and Other Buzzwords that Need to Go. Buzzwords tend to lose their meaning due to overuse, therefore becoming less effective.
Then we have jargon.
Jargon (pronounced with my French accent), is defined as “special words or expressions that are used by a particular profession or group and are difficult for others to understand, i.e. legal jargon.” When I talk, train and write about crisis communications, I always say that your audiences want (and expect) to communicate with the people behind the brand, not with your logo. As today requires you to focus on humanizing your brand, jargon can be your downfall. And yet it can be hard to break out of patterns and habits, or easy to publish an incomprehensible-to-most statement approved by legal council.
Cut jargon out of your crisis communication vocabulary
I’m in the process of reading this really great book called “The Moment of Clarity“, by Christian Madsbjerg and Mikkel B. Rasmussen. Discussing how to really understand your consumers and how they think, the authors wrote the following passage on jargon that really spoke to me, so I wanted to share it here with you:
“The German philosopher Jürgen Habermas has developed an extensive analysis of what happens when technical language out-strips the language of everyday life. He argues that the change from a normal, everyday language to a technical, specific language suggests a shift in power. When technical language conquers simple language of the every day, it is a sign that the system is gaining ground and everyday human reality, what he calls the lifeworld, is losing ground. He goes so far as to call this shift a colonization of the lifeworld; everyday life being colonized by a force of bureaucratization and rationalization that it cannot defend itself against. Such a shift leads to a far more systematic, rule-based, and technical idea of the world. It widens the gap between who we really are and the systems that we have become.
When medical students are trained to do surgery, they go through a procedure where language is used very deliberately. To create an emotional distance between the young person doing the surgery for the first time and the cadaver on the operating table, the students are taught to use highly technical and medical language to make the whole situation bearable. The body is not referred to as a person, it is called “the subject”. Removing the skin of the head is not called “remove the skin”; rather, the student “prepares the subject for incision.” The parts of the brain are all called by their Latin names. Such complex and esoteric terminology encourages doctors-in-training to divorce any personal feelings from the scientific analysis required of a medical practitioner.
We should be grateful for professionals who use language in such a purposeful and thoughtful way. In the medical world, there is a functional explanation for the dominance of technical language over everyday language. It enables the medical profession to be precise; it gives the medical field a global, applicable language; and it helps doctors-in-training do things that are beyond the norm. But does the business practitioner need the same detachment from the human world? Why are we trying to distance ourselves from the people we claim to serve?”
I love this passage. It clearly defines a purpose for using jargon and makes us reflect upon the risks of using it out-of-purpose. In a crisis, it is vitally important that your messages be communicated in a clear, concise and relatable manner. For this, you need to write in a way that a 7 year old would perfectly comprehend – which means there’s absolutely no room for jargon or technical language.
Assign someone the task
Make sure that those responsible for message approval in a crisis fully understand the need to stay away from jargon and technical language. Then, give them the task of making sure none slip by you or others before being published to your audiences in the heat of the moment.
Update
Many of you have been commenting that there is a time and place – and audience – where using technical language is needed, and you are correct. This post was looking at communicating with external audiences such as clients, customers and the general public, in which case it’s important to speak in universally understood language. It is always a case of determining your audiences and communicating in the most comprehensible and appropriate language. It is for you to judge accordingly.
Author of Crisis Ready: Building an Invincible Brand in an Uncertain World, Melissa Agnes is a leading authority on crisis preparedness, reputation management, and brand protection. Agnes is a coveted keynote speaker, commentator, and advisor to some of today’s leading organizations faced with the greatest risks. Learn more about Melissa and her work here.
A good article: thank you! Using language understood by a 7-year old is a start point; however, should crisis communicators also guard against over-simplification? In a crisis, stakeholders need to know that technically competent and experienced managers are in control and so just as doctors can use technical language sparingly to demonstrate their broader clinical knowledge, crisis communication should not shy-away from the use of terminology that may be specific to the causes and treatment of their particular crisis. In some situations and for some people it can be reassuring!
It depends on the situation. However, if for example, you need to have a technician address and answer questions, just because that technician uses technical terms doesn't make him credible. It can actually confuse and frustrate the general public, making him seem "showy" if the terms are incomprehensible to most. On the other hand, if the technician is dressed in his lab coat and communicating in terms that everyone understands and can relate to, this will give him the credibility needed to provide reassurance and show competence. I hope that answers your question, Derek!
Effective communications is audience-centered.
And should communications during a potential or real crisis involve a technical issue and a specialized audience — say the urgency for cardiologists or cardiac surgeons to actively evaluate leads to an implanted medical device — then the medical device company should use the appropriate medical and technical terminology to ensure the communication gets the doctors attention and ensures speedy follow through.
Excellent point, Bob. Turning the tables and communicating with the technical profession needs to be done in their language. Absolutely. Though when the communications need to be made to the general public, it's important that the medical device company rework their language and remember to communicate less technically as well.
When addressing internal publics, you should need to use jargon, not to let them think you are just someone who doesn't have the slightest idea of what is going on. It goes the same way when talking to some journalist specializes in the domain of the crisis: not using jargon would make him believe you are trying to avoid telling the truth by using common language to tell general things instead of going to the specifics. So, as a PR specialist working as a crisis communicator, you have to adapt to the situation and to the public you aim to through your discourse. No general rule applies! Just be adequate, no matter what!
This is something that many people in the Caribbean struggle to find the balance with as well but I totally agree with the use of simple human language. I think that sometimes we forget that the first objective is to communicate important information. I think that you can reassure persons in other ways than using words that they don't understand bit as we say made him or her " sound like they know their stuff", til whatever that stuff if. I'm a fan of simple language despite some of my former editors and lecturers disgust with simple language.
Very good point, Melissa. It serves not only for crisis communication but for the whole process as companies' daily communications will create a positive (or negative) environment to manage future crisis. So credibility is something that companies must built daily – language and empathy are key factors.