Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
The 10 worst examples of management speak
From 'action' as a verb to stakeholder not meaning someone preparing to kill a vampire, I have to admit each and every one of these words sets my teeth on edge.
What jargon drives you up the wall?
Enough with the blue sky thinking?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
"Bare with me", was the version written by one member of Haringey's staff a few years ago.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Good lord, I've used almost all of these. Going to take OAE's tip of going on holiday.
-
-
I used to love bullshit bingo. (Politely called Buzzword Bingo on Wikipedia), Sometimes the only bright spot in a pointless meeting was spotting new buzzwords.
But while it's often very funny, it's can also be scary.
You realise that decisions directly affecting us are being made by people with little grasp of what they're talking about and even less clue what needs doing. But they have to pretend. So they string together phrases which suggest action. Like: "direction of travel"; and "and going forward". We are, they explain: "on a journey" but "not yet in the place we want to be". And we need to understand that the journey isn't easy. There are "challenges". and a"steep learning curve". But don't worry. They've done "the metrics" and are ready for the "honest conversations" about "tough choices".
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Here's a programme from the Beeb some time back. I think some of it captures some of what I think. In it a manager explains that some of the most maligned terms do actually have a pretty clear meaning to those that use them. Others don't, he/she explains and could be better replaced with something else.
What's perhaps a more interesting angle for me in this discussion is why people get so upset about how others use language. It's an interesting issue. We see the same with resistance against Americanisms and youth adaptation of language.
Where language clearly communicates meaning to those for whom it is intended, I'm all for it in any form. Where it doesn't, or where it's used to exclude/discriminate, generally I'm not (I'm leaving wiggle room here because some sub-languages have been developed as a defensive tool by minorities). But, I'm against it in this respect anywhere and everywhere.
-
Permalink Reply by John D on
-
I think I get annoyed because so often accuracy or precision is lost. English is a wonderful language, capable of conveying the slightest nuance of meaning, but we are throwing that magical quality away.
The two classic ones ( for pedants like me ) are imply / infer - two different words with two different meanings - where infer is now used for both - If I infer something am I speaking or listening ?
And interested / disinterested where disinterested is used in place of uninterested. I may not be interested in the future plans of RBS but as a shareholder I'm certainly not disinterested.
Where's the clarity of communication there ?
-
Permalink Reply by Mat Day on
-
+1 for this. Language only exists to communicate. If the term used allows the other person to understand what you mean, then it has done its job.
So, John, if people using terms like disinterested or infer wrongly genuinely confuses you, then you have a legitimate gripe. But I reckon you probably know exactly what the other person means, and I genuinely I feel that we need to be as flexible as language itself is with these things.
Words won't ever lose their meanings (that allows the nuance you want to protect) as long as people continue to use them in their 'correct' sense. And if they don't, then the word will either die out or evolve with a new meaning. It's elegantly Darwinian, lol.
-
-
Yes, language evolves all the time which is what makes it interesting. Read Jane Austin and think how differently 'nice' and 'condescending' were used then.
-
-
Oops!
-
-
Take it to the extreme then Mat - all we need to do is grunt. My teenagers seemed to manage perfectly well
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Mat I thoroughly enjoyed your post!
Language only exists to communicate
Yes, was original reason for existence; has been abused and misused ever since
John, if people using terms like disinterested or infer wrongly genuinely confuses you
John probably does now the correct usage: its the abusers and misusers who are the confused
I reckon you probably know exactly what the other person means
If this was true, there'd be no more work for contract lawyers and assumes that no one every knowingly, let alone wilfully, attempts to mislead;
I feel that we need to be as flexible as language itself is with these things
I feel a career in politics beckons you
Words won't ever lose their meanings ... as long as people continue to use them in their 'correct' sense
Words change in meaning but the subject here is management speak where relatively new words (normally waffle-words) are used with the intention of:
- annoying
- confusing
- misleading
- obfuscating
- intimidating
- hiding motives
- avoiding thought
- disguising ignorance
- delaying (AKA wasting time)
-
-
Cheers Clive, likewise!
The conversation has deviated slightly from the original topic of management speak to the more general subject of the rigidity of the rules of language. My comments are less about people who try to deliberately misuse words nefariously, and more about those who are simply 'in error'. I think Johns infer/disinterested example is such a case, I don't think such examples could ever be called abuse or misuse (at least not in the generally accepted sense
)I also think that the vast majority of cases when the 'management speak' terms are used are far more innocuous than your bullet points suggest! I have used more than half the terms discussed myself, but never to intimidate, mislead or deliberately annoy. Often these words are the most efficient way to get the other person to understand what I mean, and the point of my post is that is all language needs to do.
I understand that your point is that if these words can be used to deceive, but I think it's a slightly separate issue. Perfectly 'proper' words can, and frequently are, used just as cynically.
And to John - Sometimes a grunt is all you need
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
