There Are a Few Good Questions, a Lot of Good Answers
Language fine-tuning: These are advanced techniques and nuances to increase speed and ease of gaining facts and honest analysis. They allow for flexibility and adaptation outside of one’s “home turf” and with a wide variety of people not generally under one’s control.
Adjusting Language to Audience
One size does not fit all.
In the days of domineering, autocratic, bureaucratic management, the leader’s style ruled all. That individual style was a constant that was imposed on others. There was little, if any, consideration in adapting one’s management or leadership style. Orders were barked out and everyone was expected to fall in line and follow suit. This was true figuratively and often times literally. While this style was prevalent in organizations in days gone by, it still exists. (Think of the military as an extreme example of this.)
Steve Jobs might be considered a my way or the highway type of leader. Bill Belichick of the New England Patriots is that kind of football coach.
The other extreme is the leader style that is nurturing, encompassing, fully embracing and operates exclusively in a world of decision by committee. These leaders want everyone to be happy. They figuratively lead via a fireside chat while creating a kumbaya moment. They hire consultants who lead retreats to camp in jungles or build sand castles on beaches.
To be successful in today’s organizations, leaders can no longer impose their preferred style on others and be universally effective for the long term. This is particularly true in the language they use. Even with language, one size does not fit all applies.
You cannot merely exhibit your preferred style of static language with no adjustment. Successful leaders adjust and adapt language based on audience, circumstances, purpose, and perception. Successful leaders know how to position and pivot accordingly, in any given aspect of language and communications.
Leaders are most likely to be cognizant of adjusting language to the audience. But, many are not aware of the necessity and value of adjusting language for circumstance, purpose, or perception. After all, we’ve all been taught to be consistent in our messaging. The key is to be consistent in messaging, while appropriately adjusting language. The information here applies whether:
Let’s explore adjusting language in each of these situations:
Adjusting Language to Your “Audience”
Think of the audiences you communicate with on a regular or periodic basis:
In consideration of your various audiences (individual conversations and group conversations), our advice is not to dumb-down or elevate your language based on your audience. It’s a matter of strategically focusing your messaging in regard to positioning content and language that is appropriate to you audience.
Adjusting Language to Circumstance
What are the circumstances requiring and prompting your communications? The answer to that question determines your language. Your communications may be based on:
You may be dealing with the same audience in different circumstances. You may be dealing with different audiences in different circumstances. Each of these scenarios warrants an adjustment in language.
We’ve usually heard a significant other at home say suddenly, “You know, you’re not in the office now!” That’s our cue to remember that the circumstances have changed. We speak with some clients with great familiarity, but to prospects with more arm-distance formality. I react very poorly to a company employee where I’m doing business who meets me for the first time and immediately uses my first name. I’m neither old-fashioned nor arrogant—I’m a pragmatic business person and first impressions are lasting ones. The fact that you call colleagues or even long-time clients by a first name doesn’t mean you should do that to new people under different circumstances.
The managers and captains in our favorite restaurants, our drivers, and others always use honorifics with customers: Dr., Mr., Ms. They know the circumstances merit it.
We usually have a great many clients with whom we are familiar, and well-liked and trusted. We also have many prospects who know little about us and have no experience with us. We can’t expect the familiarity of the former to travel to the latter through osmosis. We have to adjust our approaches to suit the circumstance.
Some examples:
A brief digression, but also relevant: This is why first dates are so terror-laden and often failures. The circumstances are attended by confusing and conflicting factors: Do I appear desperate? Am I asking enough questions? Should I talk less? Can I have a second drink? Should I mention my religion? Should I mention that I have a child? Should I mention that I like their cologne?
We can all adapt that to an initial sales meeting, a college interview, a traffic officer’s stop, or a pushy salesperson. We’re not ourselves because of the circumstances, and we have to adjust.
Similarly, some circumstances create overwhelming language, intimate language, revealing language. No, I’m not talking about a beautiful moon and romantic music. I’ve found that bartenders seem to encourage customer revelation; people who are allowed to touch you, such as manicurists and hair dressers, engage in intimate conversations. They probably hear more honesty and detail than some therapists.
That’s because the circumstances are encouraging for such talk, shared secrets with a virtual stranger. My advice is to keep control of your language at all times by controlling the circumstances. Just as you shouldn’t get drunk or reveal secrets to a beautician, you shouldn’t expect familiarity from a new prospect or immediate trust on a first date.
Adjusting Language to Purpose
You may think purpose is the same as circumstance. But, they are not the same. Circumstance is related to the condition that exists and prompts your communications. Purpose is what you want to accomplish with your communications. Continuing with our theme here, you must adjust language related to purpose. Your purpose may be to:
Inform
When you wish to inform, you should use factual language that is not mixed with opinion or speculation. Inform and information are cognates. We wish to provide facts.
Written language is an ideal medium in which to inform. There is no debate needed and interaction can be at a minimum. Questions can be asked via return mail. This is why meetings are such poor places to exchange information and are often so boring and elongated. Meetings are appropriate for decisions requiring consensus and joint analysis, but not for the mere conveyance of information.
You’ll find many books that confuse opinion and fact, especially among politicians and those with philosophical agendas. One may have the opinion that vaccines are more dangerous than not vaccinating children, but that is not the scientific fact, which shows just the opposite.
Use language that is evidence and observation-based: “We witnessed lack of participation,” rather than, “She is not a team player.” Be succinct. Facts speak for themselves. In general, the longer one speaks or writes, the more suspect the factual nature of the communication.
The Gettysburg Address and the Preamble to the Constitution are remarkably brief documents.
Educate
This is the act of assisting in others’ learning. It, too, should be factually based, except in instances of philosophic, political, or theological necessity. But we’re considering it here as social instruction.
Educational language needs to be nonbiased and pragmatic. It should reflect a range of views and provide processes, not merely content. In other words, in today’s world, one can easily look up the years of the French Revolution. But learning about its causes, aftermath, and impact elsewhere is a qualitative experience. Hence, educational language should provide insights, challenge, positive inquiry, and self-testing. It’s better to ask what the years of the French Revolution were, better yet to ask its impact on America, but best of all to ask if such factors could occur again today.
In business, the question sequence would rise from, “Are we selling more than our competition?” to “Why are we selling more than our competition?” to “How can we dominate this market?”
Influence
Wielding influence means wielding language. This language anticipates or creates the self-interests of the person or group you are attempting to influence. A common example: “This offer is only good until Friday at 5 pm.” The implication here is one of scarcity: Act now or you won’t have the opportunity to act at all. You will never own this, at least not at this price.
Here is an example of language working in a group business setting. You could ask people to state what their position is on a proposed price increase. Once they state it publicly, they have committed, and it’s tough (because of ego) to change their position. However, if you ask them to simply write down their position without their name and tally the responses, you can often achieve a change in opinion. (In the jury room, this is called secret polling, where acquit or convict can be tallied early but not with anyone committing publicly.)
Profitable Language
If you want to persuade someone to change their mind who has already committed to a position, provide new information (e.g., Did I mention that we would delay the announcement until after the fiscal year ends?). New information allows for a graceful change of one’s mind (Oh, I didn’t know that before!). Promote.
Publicize or Promote
We are allowed hyperbole when we promote:
This is the warp and woof of the advertising industry and is generally both given and received with a grain (or a ton) of salt. The idea here is to capture attention, to use the drama of the language, and to not focus on the accuracy of the language.
We expect people to be excited by exciting language, and promotion—whether personal or organizational—must adhere to this equation. Some examples:
You can dispute or disprove any of these statements, but that’s not the point. This language is not about informing or educating, but about publicizing and promoting.
To summarize, here’s one that I made up: If you don’t blow your own horn, there isn’t any music.
Dispute and Debate
When you are disputing or debating (arguing), your language must be a combination of influential and factual. What you must avoid at all costs is personal critique and attack.
The latter is known as ad hominem language, meaning appealing to emotions and not logic, visceral and not cognitive, subjective and not objective. Negotiation, compromise, and conflict resolution all collapse when language becomes personally offensive, employs epithets, and mocks instead of informings.
This is schoolyard language: “That’s because you’re a jerk!” But we hear milder versions of this in the boardroom, on office floor, and in e-mail. “I don’t see any indication of your turning in a cost estimate” is too often met with “That’s because you don’t read them anyway and are too lazy to do them yourself!”
If the object of engaging in debate is to win a point or settle a dispute, then your language has to be positive. If you have ulterior motives, then your language will reflect increasingly personal and dysfunctional dynamics.
Remember: Warfare is simply the least subtle form of communications, diplomacy by lesser means.
Adjusting Language to Perception
Case Study
I was on the train to New York when the gentleman sitting on the aisle next to me left for the restroom carrying something that I paid no attention to. When he returned, he was accosted by a woman who had been sitting across the aisle.
“You have some nerve taking 10 minutes to shave in the restroom,” she yelled, “it’s highly inconsiderate.”
“I wasn’t in there for 10 minutes (he was not),” he explained calmly, “and this case has insulin, I’m diabetic, and I was taking my dose.”
She left, still somewhat miffed, and I told the man I would have tossed her off the train while it was still moving. We’ve all engaged in these embarrassing gaffes.
Throughout this book, we’ve discussed the good, the bad, and the challenging of perceptions from multiple angles and perspectives. So, what language adjustments are required related to perceptions?
Perception, we’re told, is reality. But whose? Only our own. Eyewitnesses often contradict each other because they have varying perceptions of the same event. “Were you watching what I was watching?” is a common query after two people have starkly differing views of the same theatrical event.
Our perceptions are altered by:
Profitable Language
Never assume your perception is identical to that of others. Always test, especially in critical decisions.
How do we deal with the language of perception reconciliation? Fortunately, it’s not difficult, at least in business settings.*
The key to adjusting language for perceptions is to test understanding. Ask the other people what they experienced. Ask them to describe it, don’t merely rely on your own perceptions. Example: “I thought the client was very circumspect during the meeting, and there was no guarantee of a reorder, even the hint that we should change our sales manager. What did you think?” (Note that it’s always a good idea to ask others’ perceptions first, particularly if you are their superior, so as not to influence their perceptions!)
Test understanding with clients, customers, suppliers, regulators, peers, superiors, and subordinates. It’s nonthreatening and even hard to detect what you’re doing. But the language will be instrumental in alerting as to how others are viewing things, their likely course of action, how to influence them, and what to expect later.
A second major element in perception reconciliation is to simplify the issue, because of the factors above that can skew perceptions away from reality.† Ergo, we have to clarify. Examples: “If you removed the discussion about this meeting suffering from too much noise in the halls, how do you think the client actually felt about our service?” or “If we were to assume that we all arrived here this month, what would we actually think of the operation?”
The final aspect of language in perception is to be careful of our own. We should point out what we observed or heard or sensed, but not as empirical reality and not as absolutes. We should say, “I perceived that she was rushed, and didn’t want to make a hasty decision, what did you perceive?” or “I saw him keep glancing at his watch, did you see the same thing.”
We need this kind of constant, mutual validations because our perceptions are often wrong. We may see someone glancing at e-mail, only to be told that person was glancing at meeting notes stored on an iPhone. I once thought a woman knitting during my speech was simply rude, but afterward she came up to ask some very cogent questions. When I pointed out the knitting, she said, “That’s how I concentrate.”
I once asked a man behind me who kept bumping me, “Are you blind?”
“Yes,” he said, “as a matter of fact, I am!” and I turned to see him and a perturbed-looking, large guide dog.
Case Study
I was driving down the western, deserted part of the Massachusetts Turnpike when I saw in the distance a large dog stuck between the rails of the highway safety dividers on the roadside. I was driving a convertible with the top down and a manual transmission.
As I decelerated and pulled over to help the dog, it finally got free, and I found myself looking at a substantial black bear, three feet away, peering at me over the passenger door. I barely got the car into gear, my hand was shaking so much.
To paraphrase President Reagan, trust our perceptions, but then verify.
* In family settings, all bets are off. There is a plethora of history, emotionalism, and biases that get in the way. With family, stand fast only in principle (we have never and will never lie on our taxes) and not in taste (our first date was a movie? I guess I’m wrong, I thought it was the prom.)
† You may be wondering, “Whose reality?” For our purposes, reality is the empirical actuality that most people would find accurate, for example, the sky is blue, the sun rises in the east, most people walk upright. In business, sales are down from last year at this juncture, we’ve had higher attrition than industry averages this year, we’re over budget for the first six months.