
Corporate buzzwords are how workers pretend to be adults - bayonetz
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/02/most-annoying-corporate-buzzwords/606748/
======
MatekCopatek
I sometimes use business talk as a tool to make countering my points
unattractive when having public discussions inside the company.

For example - let's say your boss decides to introduce some mandatory meeting
that everyone agrees is useless. Rather then complaining about it in normal
language, I would say things like "well, one of our core values is delighting
clients, which I would be able to do much more efficiently if we would iterate
on our process and try to optimize the time currently used by this meeting".

The example is intentionally simplified and the response is exaggerated, but
you get the point - they are the ones encouraging you to use those phrases,
which makes it more difficult for them to push back when you do it against
them.

The only real risk is a coworker bursting into laughter in the middle of such
an exchange.

~~~
dntbnmpls
Oh "values". This meaningless buzzword has creeped into every facet of modern
life. From politicians and their "western values" to CEOs and their "values"
to baseball teams and their "values", everyone uses "values" to justify their
evil or to defend or excuse their evil. And of course there is the "alignment"
of "values".

Oh, stealing signs doesn't align with your team's values. We benefited from it
greatly for years, but it doesn't align with our values since we got caught.

It's like an amoral organization's PR version of "my mamma taught me better
than that". Some juvenile delinquent gets caught stealing from the store and
he says, "I don't know why I did that. That's not me, that's not who I am, I'm
not a thief. My momma taught me better than that." If he incorporated himself,
he could've said, his actions did not align with his values. Problem solved.

~~~
CPLX
I disagree, I think “values” is a great word that has a clear meaning. It‘s a
statement of what things you consider more important than others.

The problem you’re outlining here is that people often use the word while
lying.

~~~
rat9988
This is due to the word meaning having multiple meanings.. Example:

"The values we all shares are fundamental"

We all know the meaning of the word values used in this sentence. we don't
know it means what in this context, though. Am i talking about freedom?
Equality? Somehing else?

------
vector_spaces
"The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between
one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long
words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink.

...

A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then
fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing
that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate
because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes
it easier for us to have foolish thoughts."

[https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_poli...](https://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit)

------
cosmodisk
I had a "pleasure" to work briefly for Lionbridge when they acquired the
company I worked for. We used to get these company wide emails about various
things. You read it,sit and then think how can someone rape the language to a
such degree. It was written in English but felt like alien language. The
amount of bullshit one manages to squeeze in a sentence is quite astonishing.
In my opinion, the main reason behind all these buzzwords is insecurity.
People think that if they'd speak plain English (insert any language here),
they'd be inferior.

~~~
Cthulhu_
Or that their true intentions / feelings would be exposed. I mean, "management
wanted to curtail redundancies in the human resources area, and so, many
workers are no longer viable members of the workforce" sounds much nicer than
"yeah we fired a bunch of people".

~~~
homonculus1
Exactly, it's verbal defense-in-depth. When language has multiple layers of
vagueness, you have to actively approach the real meaning through
interpretation. Only the staunchly disagreeable are inclined to have a
negative reaction through multiple iterations of reading between the lines,
and if they speak up they get singled out as not-team-players or even cranks
and kooks. The rest filter it through an attitude of generosity, desire for
positivity, and benefit of doubt, so when they get the message its emotional
weight is dampened, and they are in a suitable frame of mind to accept it with
resignation.

In short it's pure manipulation of your own tendencies for social cooperation.
Perhaps a bit colorful to say on HN but--it's fucking disgusting. And multiple
fields of high-paying professions consist entirely of doing this effectively,
up to the scale of entire nations.

------
Doches
I love Matt Levine's take on this:

> From my time in investment banking I can easily believe that most investment
> banking transactions occur because investment bankers are pretending to do
> what investment bankers do, acting out scenes from “Liar’s Poker” until they
> start to seem real. I don’t know why investment banking would be different
> from any other industry. So sure, yeah, work is a kind of pretense.

~~~
lonelappde
What did bankers do before Liars Poker? If Liars poker didn't reflect reality,
why did he write it?

~~~
Psyladine
Liars Poker reflected a sudden and gross change in the industry due to hyper-
success. They went from boring mortgage firms to the richest organizations in
human history within a decade, and it distorted thinking and emotional
responses, as lottery winnings are wont to.

------
docdeek
A startup I worked for was constantly seeking to have everyone _aligned_ on
things. The original concept of having people pointed in the same direction
was admirable, but it quickly became something like a capital-A ‘Aligned’
(meaning good) with the inverse capital-U ‘Unaligned’ being about the worst
thing you could be. God help the person who found the word ‘Unaligned’ on
their semester review...

~~~
jmnicolas
It sounds like a cult !

~~~
hyperpallium
That sounds unaligned. Please report to the Alignment Center at your earliest
convenience. Escorts will be available for your use in 20 seconds.

~~~
kilroy_jones
This may not sound the way you intended.

~~~
ljm
I’ve tried to read that for a solid few minutes and _still_ can’t see what
else could have been intended.

~~~
coldpie
"Escorts" is a term for high-end sex workers.

------
undebuggable
As we are at the word play, TIL "turgid", "shibboleth", "cloying",
"hackneyed", "wheelhouse", "iconoclast".

To native English speakers I advice to try at least once in their career an
employer with English as a business language but not headquartered in any
Anglosphere country, where English is a second language to the most employees
- the communication dynamics in such environments is quite different and the
American corporate newspeak doesn't stick.

~~~
blaser-waffle
+1 to this. We have a lot of offshore support teams, and I've lost close to 20
minutes explaining "nitty-gritty"

------
greendestiny_re
Blizzard developer interviews often involve phrases from the Dictionary of
Management Jargon [1].

Consider this excerpt from an interview [2] with Steven Chang and David Kosak
done on February 6, 2020 regarding the Galakrond's Awakening expansion for
Hearthstone after the players complained about the game being unbalanced:

>In terms of the minor balance changes we’ve been doing recently, it’s
something where we want to try and see where we can strike that balance where
the community feels happy about it without introducing too much change so that
the game feels completely different. This is a fine line to walk, and we will
always be watching and listening to the community about the amount and timings
of changes.

No actual detail is given on anything, it's all empty feelgood sentences.
Entire paragraphs go on like this, stating opinions and desires as outlined in
the DoMJ:

>Statements of desires – A statement that something is hoped for does not
imply any action is to be taken to ensure the desired outcome. Example: I want
us all to be happy with our compensation.

1\.
[http://dictionaryofmanagementjargon.yolasite.com/](http://dictionaryofmanagementjargon.yolasite.com/)

2\. [https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/interview-with-
hearthsto...](https://www.hearthstonetopdecks.com/interview-with-hearthstone-
game-designers-dave-kosak-stephen-chang-galakronds-awakening-a-year-long-
storyline-and-the-shaman-fiasco/)

------
mr_overalls
This kind of language usage isn't limited to fitting in socially in the
business world.

People use overly-elaborate language to appear intelligent or innovative, too.
I once spent some time learning a martial art whose founder had replaced all
of the standard names for movement and techniques with novel, quasi-technical-
sounding ones.

"Multiple attackers" became "plural assailants", "breathing technique" became
"respiratory enhancement". "Sparring" became "fisticuffs". Etc.

It was maddening, because he would correct students who slipped up and failed
to use his terminology.

[https://www.usadojo.com/ross-performance-enhancement-
system/](https://www.usadojo.com/ross-performance-enhancement-system/)

------
yesbabyyes
It may not be quite the same thing, but this reminds me of Venkatesh Rao's
"Posture talk" from his Gervais Principle series:

[https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-
principle-...](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-ii-
posturetalk-powertalk-babytalk-and-gametalk/)

~~~
CheesecakeFred
I was going to comment on this article, but realized it is futile to go into
detail and critizise it at this place.

Simply put I would stay far away from articles and people thinking the way
Venkatesh Rao exhibits here. Highly toxic and inhumane management bullshit.

~~~
blaser-waffle
I've come to the same conclusion after reading the article a few times. It
pops up on HN a lot.

It's a hilarious and dark read, and certainly has grains of truth, but framing
your worldview around that is silly and dangerous.

Rao is a good writer, but he's filtering a parody comic through a parody show,
with additions from Dilbert (another parody), and supplements the arguments
with examples from management gurus of questionable relevance. It's like Jean
Baudrillard's Simulacra, where it's a simulation (parody) filtered through
another simulation filtered through _another_ simulation until you have
something that doesn't reflect reality.

------
SimonSword
This reminded me of the section about "Clutter" in the book "On writing well":

> Clutter is the official language used by corporations to hide their
> mistakes. When the Digital Equipment Corporation eliminated 3,000 jobs its
> statement didn’t mention layoffs; those were “involuntary methodologies.”
> When an Air Force missile crashed, it “impacted with the ground
> prematurely.”

~~~
Cthulhu_
I like how in Kerbal Space Program, you don't crash, you "lithobrake". Like
airbraking only on something with a bit more resistance.

~~~
sethammons
I had a science teacher who would kill mice before feeding them to his snake.
His method was "rapid deceleration" (he threw them at the ground).

~~~
WorldPeas
Our science teacher in the 7th grade made a model coliseum out of foam-core
and would release crickets into it for her lizards to eat during homeroom

~~~
sethammons
That's fantastic haha.

------
RaceWon
Is it really word play: Car Insurance is sold via a talking "cartoonesque
lizard", medications that may help your dry skin (or possibly kill you--
depending on your particular physiology) are also sold at times via similar
talking animated creatures--or implied peer pressure... I could go on and on.
So I often ask: how mature or advanced are we really? I personally, am not
Impressed.

------
czzr
All areas of practice have their own jargon, words that superficially sound
similar to regular English but actually have specific insider meaning that
promotes faster in-group communication (and a degree of in-group signalling) -
this is true for scientists, software engineers, yoga instructors and yes,
business people.

~~~
skytreader
> that promotes faster in-group communication

I think the reason that business jargon gets more flak than usual jargon is
because it does not really facilitate faster communication. At least not to
everyone involved. Maybe salesman to salesman, business dev to business dev,
it would make sense. But then they use that jargon with everyone else (i.e.,
when it is not appropriate to) and it sounds just as ridiculous as when they
hear a dev say "We can't do that without considerable infrastructure overhaul.
The current LTS is still a year away from EOL but the vendor has decided to
use incompatible dependencies anyway".

If that were me, I'd just say "There's a lot of work involved to make that
happen. We're talking 60-hour work weeks if you want that deadline." Or
something like that. And if you hear me use the former wording in a meeting
with non-technical people involved, you can bet it's just me trying to sound
relevant to the meeting (because the next question would be "Could you
elaborate?" and I will use more jargon, which will cause a cycle of
explanation and boy won't I look important?)

It's ridiculous for me to hear "We need to get this done because we want to
capture this market and turn this vertical into a core competency. This will
make our portfolio more attractive to investors." when you can just say "Our
client really needs/wants these features. We risk losing them if we don't
deliver by the deadline."

There's also something to be said about weird turns of phrase that make
communications sound less personal. Whereas I would just say "As I already
told you," business-speak will make me use "As per my last email...". I don't
know about others but the first time I encountered "As per my last email", it
did feel foreign to me, like it's not English anymore. Modesty aside, I've
read a lot, fiction and nonfiction, but only in my work inbox will I find "As
per my last email".

~~~
pas
> As per my last email

Isn't this just the "As I've written in my last letter" for the e-mail era?
Maybe it's just a cultural difference. (In my native language - and probably
because of that in English too - I try use the verbs corresponding to the
medium, so if I wrote to someone then I'll refer to that communication as "as
you probably read" instead of "heard", and so on.)

~~~
skytreader
> Isn't this just the "As I've written in my last letter" for the e-mail era?

It might as well be. It just always struck me as wrong usage, for lack of
better term. "Per", to me, is always in the sense of "for each": per month,
per head, etc.

That said, I decided to look it up. And quoting from [https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/as%20per](https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/as%20per):

> Is It Grammatically Correct to Say _as per_?

> ...The more ponderous as per is often found in business and legal prose, or
> in writing that attempts to adopt a formal tone. It is not incorrect to use,
> but some find it overly legalistic and counsel avoiding it for that reason.
> On the other hand, it has been used to good effect in facetious mock-
> business-English ("as per the President’s shiny new Environmental Policy
> Act"). ...

Looks like I'm not the only one who was puzzled by this turn of phrase. You
learn new things everyday. :)

(edit: formatting)

~~~
pas
I thought it comes from some tortured Latin (see "per se", and per also
meaning "by means of"). And the "as" shouldn't even be there.

------
granshaw
Two of the more recent ones that really grate me are “lift” (which isn’t even
used consistently, eg “what is the lift (effort) on this” and “how much lift
(benefit) would this give us”)... and “North Star” _shudder_

~~~
bballer
Haven't heard the "lift" one yet but it feels like a bunch of high school
students trying to create their own internal jargon which makes them appear
more "hip" per se. Just replace a word with another, adding 0 value and
excluding those who don't "get it" therefore creating an exclusivity around
it's usage.

Also the "North Star" one, whew, shudder is correct. Let's bury that one
forever.

------
friendlybus
Well this is a mean spirited attempt at destroying words that have meaning.
Some people use them incorrectly and the nature of business moves on making
them ineffective. Attacking them on multiple levels without describing when
they are used in a positive sense seems unnecessary.

~~~
MatekCopatek
Can you give an example of some words you feel are being unfairly criticized?
I.e. words that actually carry more meaning then their "plain" alternatives.

~~~
antiterra
‘Root cause’ is neither redundant nor simply a ‘corporate buzzword.’ It
represents a clear concept of a causal chain with an underlying factor that
gates all other contributing causes. The term has been around for a century
and ‘root cause analysis’ is a formal construct in a number of professional
contexts, including analysis of aviation incidents.

~~~
phkahler
Except when people use it as a verb as in "we need to root cause this".

~~~
Macha
It's got a clear brevity win over "we need to look into this to find the root
cause" or "we need to perform a root cause analysis on this". This isn't the
case for "resources" instead of "people", or deliberate obfuscation like the
article's example of "we're happy to provide you with the paperwork to provide
to your insurance company" instead of "we only take direct payments" or "your
feedback is greatly appreciated" for "no" or "we have a new billing model to
suit the next few years of sustainable development" for "we're raising prices"

------
flowerbrower
Ah! [http://unsuck-it.com/](http://unsuck-it.com/)

------
mysterydip
I saw this in the DoD when I was a contractor. Meetings full of buzzwords and
abbreviations, some of which seemed to be tribal knowledge more than an actual
thing. Things like "that solution won't work because of ABCD," and everyone
nods in agreement. I had written down every abbreviation I heard to ask my
supervisor later, and some he (and others) couldn't tell me what they stood
for, despite being there for decades.

~~~
Krasnol
I worked once for a big global F500 company whose name is a abbreviation. In a
meeting while we've been waiting I asked around if anybody knows what it
actually means. Some tried to make up something. Everybody failed to come up
with the actual meaning.

------
praptak
Corporate buzzwords are also how to say things that you can weasel out of
later.

------
cormacrelf
There was a great piece on this yesterday by Molly Young. In my opinion, it
was significantly better. It contained this excellent point:

> As the leaked Slacks make clear, Korey, as well as her employees, were
> working under the new conditions of surveillance-state capitalism (or, from
> the company’s perspective, a culture of “inclusion and transparency”). One
> reason for the uptick in garbage language is exactly this sense of nonstop
> supervision. Employers can read emails and track keystrokes and monitor
> locations and clock the amount of time their employees spend noodling on
> Twitter. In an environment of constant auditing, it’s safer to use words
> that signify nothing and can be stretched to mean anything, just in case
> you’re caught and required to defend yourself.

[https://www.thecut.com/2020/02/spread-of-corporate-
speak.htm...](https://www.thecut.com/2020/02/spread-of-corporate-speak.html)

~~~
lonelappde
And this has always been true in PR and board room battles, but now is seeping
to everwhere. Perhaps the rank and file will start to understand how execs and
politicians have always suffered from the microscope.

------
dTal
I don't have anything to contribute, apart from a link to a comic which sums
it up hilariously:

[http://www.amazingsuperpowers.com/2013/03/business-
men/](http://www.amazingsuperpowers.com/2013/03/business-men/)

------
jon-wood
I’m curious when people swapped the word reply with revert. I keep seeing
people use phrases like “I’ll revert” when what they mean is “I’ll look into
that and get back to you”. Particularly working in software I always have to
stop myself when the initial reaction is that they’ve just said they’ll undo
what I’ve requested.

~~~
taejo
I believe that this usage is archaic in British business English rather than
an innovation! However, it was conserved in business English in India and some
other countries, and perhaps the increased interaction between Americans and
Indians and in the software industry means you're just exposed to it more
often?

~~~
tomatocracy
The word revert, with this meaning, is still in widespread use in business in
Britain too, in my experience.

~~~
growlist
Doubtful. I've worked in the UK for more than 20 years, and the only time I've
ever heard this usage is within outsourced IT providers in India.

~~~
tomatocracy
Perhaps it's industry specific but in finance/investment I see it used all the
time (and I use it myself - I'm a Brit).

------
badrabbit
There are people that love this stuff. Mind boggling to me how people can
write pages and listen to hours on end. Some jobs require you to make speeches
and write pages and pages of this lawsuit unfriendly botton line oriented
language. Insane.

------
ajryan
Another, better-written take on this: [https://www.thecut.com/2020/02/spread-
of-corporate-speak.htm...](https://www.thecut.com/2020/02/spread-of-corporate-
speak.html)

------
therockspush
This article has a clear value-prop.

We can table this discussion for now. Lets take it offline.

------
Wooddar
This problem is exactly why I decided to create my Slack app Whatis!
[https://whatis.rocks/](https://whatis.rocks/)

~~~
Zhyl
Shouldn't it be "What _are_ rocks?"

~~~
rimliu
I sometimes use "whois X?", even if the correct form would be "what is?" or
"who are?". Using and old IRCism is just more fun.

~~~
Zhyl
I guess it would depend whether you were accessing the URL in the second or
third person.

------
mclightning
Are workers not adults? I thought child labour was forbidden.

