Buzzwords: Thumbs Up and Thumbs Down

[Foolmewunz]

Everyone's got their pet hates ("grow your business" was mine for ages), but do you actually employ them and if so, which ones do you actually like or use?

Like:

Viral Marketing - just love the image it creates in my fevered imagination
(I have no use for it in my business, though!)

Hate:
Push the Envelope - just what the H does it mean?
Seamless - so overused in my business

Use:
Think Outside the Box - lazy habit! I could just as easily say, "be creative".
Win Win - ditto above

Recently I've been forcing myself to use Think Outside the Envelope. It helps me to remember not to use trite expressions.

[jimbob]

"Blue sky thinkuing"

"Low hanging fruit"

The trouble is that sometimes there is a valid concept, being hidden by the jargon.


"open our kimonos"

sometimes not

[AgeGap]

I never thought I would post in the Business Skepticism part but I want to say I hate the word facilitate. I was once told to avoid the stupid buzzwords and this would facilitate clients understanding. Facilitate is a stupid buzzword. I remember when people were helped.
Also when some big boss refers to the minions as colleagues. I once saw a Tesco boss do this and now it has crept into the NHS.
Message to management...
"Where the hell are all you colleagues when it comes to cleaning up the blood and puke?"
And why do people with booklets refer to them as hard copies.
"Hear it, do not input any thought or common sense, repeat it." This will be our mantra.

[AgeGap]

Quote from blobru authentic empowerment to commit to a personal stance both proactive and visionary in its entrepreneurial paradigm... "hey! you in the rayon tie and half-rolled up sleeves: go ***** yourself, ok?

[Foolmewunz]

"Blue sky thinkuing"

"Low hanging fruit"

The trouble is that sometimes there is a valid concept, being hidden by the jargon.


"open our kimonos"

sometimes not

Oooh! "Low Hanging Fruit"! I have a colleague who uses it constantly. It's a great image and brings the message home nicely, but she overworks it. She's also big on....

Mining for Opportunities

[Spindrift]

Not really a buzzword:
Give 110% effort.

I hate that. The most one can give is 100% of their effort.

So if you give 110% that just means you weren't giving 100% before or you got someone to help you out.

[Rob Lister]

Push the Envelope - just what the H does it mean?


I think [the use of] pushing the envelope dates back to attempting to surpass the speed of sound. Attempting anything right on the edge of the impossible.

The one I hate is Synergy.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I realize it's not really fair of me, but as soon as someone says going forward, my brain disconnects.

Also, thumbs down to everything ever stated in a corporate mission statement, vision statement, or the equivalent.

http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/games/career/bin/ms.cgi

~~ Paul

[MWare]

I don't mean to be overly contrarian here, but I often hear people complain about these business "buzz words" and I frankly don't understand why they bother people so much.

For example above, why does "going forward" bother you? I suppose there's many other things you could say "from now on", "from here on out", etc. What makes "going forward" so bad? I use it on occasion and it seems that people have understood me. That is the point of communication - and having several different ways to say the same thing helps make dialog and conversation interesting doesn't it? It doesn't seem to offend anyone, but if it does I don't understand why? Is it because it is "new"? Wasn't every expression new at some point? I mean just look at some of the buzzwords and pithy phrases Shakespeare invented. (some examples http://www.pathguy.com/shakeswo.htm). For example the phrase "Full circle". Kind of an interesting way to say "back to where you started". I like it, I use it. What's the problem? Would this have counted as an annoying "buzzword" in Shakespeare's day?

[HarryKeogh]

"sense of urgency" - blah!

[Ohmer]

Think Outside the Box - lazy habit! I could just as easily say, "be creative".

Sometimes thinking outside the box makes you rediscover why the box is there in the first place. The hard way. I like "be creative".

[HarryKeogh]

Sometimes thinking outside the box makes you rediscover why the box is there in the first place. The hard way. I like "be creative".

My cat thinks outside the box. Now he's crapping everywhere.

[KoihimeNakamura]

I have yet to run into buzzwords as a habit, as I am yet to exit college, but I was under the impression that most buzzwords are boilerplate..?

[Spindrift]

I don't mean to be overly contrarian here, but I often hear people complain about these business "buzz words" and I frankly don't understand why they bother people so much.

For example above, why does "going forward" bother you? I suppose there's many other things you could say "from now on", "from here on out", etc. What makes "going forward" so bad? I use it on occasion and it seems that people have understood me. That is the point of communication - and having several different ways to say the same thing helps make dialog and conversation interesting doesn't it? It doesn't seem to offend anyone, but if it does I don't understand why? Is it because it is "new"? Wasn't every expression new at some point? I mean just look at some of the buzzwords and pithy phrases Shakespeare invented. (some examples http://www.pathguy.com/shakeswo.htm). For example the phrase "Full circle". Kind of an interesting way to say "back to where you started". I like it, I use it. What's the problem? Would this have counted as an annoying "buzzword" in Shakespeare's day?

Buzzwords and buzzphrases tend to get grossly overused by some people so that the buzzwords become annoying. There is also the feeling I have that some people use buzzwords in order to look cool. "Look at me I don't say "I'm going to give me employees what they need to do their job", I'm going to "empower" them. Buzzwords are used like a secret code that only the really 'smart' people know about.

[Denial]

Not really a buzzword:
Give 110% effort.

I hate that. The most one can give is 100% of their effort.

So if you give 110% that just means you weren't giving 100% before or you got someone to help you out.

I totally agree with you there. It makes me cringe.

"Signaleffekt" (signal-effect) is a word often used by politicians and law enforcement personell here in Norway. The idea is that if you decriminalize or allow a certain behavior, or even loose up on some restrictions, everyone (almost always referring to youth, though) will start doing it in excess.

Examples:
We can't legalize marijuana, think of the signaleffekt.
Allowing liqour stores to be open longer gives our youth a signaleffekt that it's ok to drink more booze.

I generally find it a very bad idea to suggest that young adults can't think for themselves.

[Ohmer]

I don't mean to be overly contrarian here, but I often hear people complain about these business "buzz words" and I frankly don't understand why they bother people so much.

Buzzwords bother me when they are used in place of actual content. When a big mucky mucky says "We will empower our team members to create synergy among departments moving forward", that mucky muck has said exactly nothing. If buzzwords are use appropriately in conjunction with actual content, I don't mind them at all. For example, "We have implemented X to empower our team members to accomplish Y, which will create synergy among departments moving forward.

Context is everything.

[Foolmewunz]

Sees Opportunities, Not Problems

So overused. I have about half of my staff doing monitoring and DQ, and this old saw is in the annual review form. I always cheat on the scoring (putting into a neutral score) because I sure as Hell hope that when the fireman shows up to put out the fire he sees a problem. Problem = house on fire. Opportunity = marshmallow roast?

I got into a huge fight with the testing/assessing firm we use and our HR people over this.

[supercorgi]

My cat thinks outside the box. Now he's crapping everywhere.

LOL! Pithy!

[supercorgi]

Oooh! "Low Hanging Fruit"! I have a colleague who uses it constantly.[/B]

That's been used a lot around my workplace lately. :rolleyes: I will always, and forever hate the word "synergy!"

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

For example above, why does "going forward" bother you? I suppose there's many other things you could say "from now on", "from here on out", etc. What makes "going forward" so bad? I use it on occasion and it seems that people have understood me.
There is nothing technically wrong with going forward. For some reason, though, for me, it is the epitome of unnecessary postmodern corporate-speak. A lot of these words sound like the sort of vocabulary a politician would use in order not to say anything.

Stop telling me to think outside the box synergistically so we can pick low-hanging fruit seamlessly going forward. Just tell me what the hell you want.

As Ohmer said.

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

... empower ...
Nope, sorry, that word has no business in the English language. :D

~~ Paul

[AgeGap]

"sense of urgency" - blah!
I first heard that during my basic training where it made sense.
Does anyone do 'hot desking' anymore?

[jimbob]

Does anyone have a little more-or less innocent fun coining their own, preferably slightly unsavoury ones?

"This is a real Mussolini problem, we just need the right lamp-post"

No, I don't know what it means either.

[The Atheist]

Does anyone do 'hot desking' anymore?

Lat time I did that it left marks.

[Hokulele]

Everyone I know in the computer industry has started misusing "bandwidth".

"Will you finish that report this week?"

"Sorry, I just don't have the bandwidth right now."


Rrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

[Foolmewunz]

Everyone I know in the computer industry has started misusing "bandwidth".

"Will you finish that report this week?"

"Sorry, I just don't have the bandwidth right now."


Rrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Ewwww! I'll be watching for that - it hasn't hit these shores, yet.

[Charlie Monoxide]

If there's one word that makes me wince, it's "pro-active".

What are the users of this word implying? They're for "active" (unlike those lazy, do-nothing competitors who are "agin" active).

I've heard a number of management and motivational-type people use the word. When I hear it, my eyes instantly glaze over, and I go into a stupor ...

Charlie (a pro-active stupor, though) Monoxide

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Does anyone have a little more-or less innocent fun coining their own, preferably slightly unsavoury ones?
I use the term Dilbertesque quite frequently.

~~ Paul

[The Atheist]

If there's one word that makes me wince, it's "pro-active".

What are the users of this word implying? They're for "active" (unlike those lazy, do-nothing competitors who are "agin" active).

I've heard a number of management and motivational-type people use the word. When I hear it, my eyes instantly glaze over, and I go into a stupor ...

Charlie (a pro-active stupor, though) Monoxide

Eh?

Not sure whether you might be having a jape here, but proactive is good, being the opposite of reactive. Do you want a sales rep who sits at his desk waiting for customers to call (reactive), or one who gets out there and makes it happen (proactive)?

If you have a more succinct way of putting it, let me know - I use it all the time!

[Foolmewunz]

I think I agree with both of you (Charlie and T.A.) on "proactive", somewhat.

I think it's over-used, and I sometimes wonder if the user has the basic understanding of what the word means. It's become a mantra much like "sees opportunities, not problems". So that extent, I think Charlies' got a point.

However, T.A. has it precisely right. It's got a very specific meaning and I find that there's no other single word that can be used in its place. If there was one, I'd use it... but just because, as I said, proactive is over-used.

Plus - it's just not a nice word. It kind of grates on me.

[jmercer]

A few I've found useful for getting points across:

"Don't boil the ocean to make a cup of tea" - used when discussion about a project's goal starts to get really broad and deep; I like it better than "scope creep".

"PEBKAC" - Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair. Incredibly useful. :)

[Modified]

I frequently see job postings by software companies that "manage relationships", "help clients gain market power", "implement next-generation technologies", etc. etc. They sometimes go on for several pages without giving the slightest hint as to what it is they actually do.

[fuelair]

Everyone's got their pet hates ("grow your business" was mine for ages), but do you actually employ them and if so, which ones do you actually like or use?

Like:

Viral Marketing - just love the image it creates in my fevered imagination
(I have no use for it in my business, though!)

Hate:
Push the Envelope - just what the H does it mean?
Seamless - so overused in my business

Use:
Think Outside the Box - lazy habit! I could just as easily say, "be creative".
Win Win - ditto above

Recently I've been forcing myself to use Think Outside the Envelope. It helps me to remember not to use trite expressions.Push the envelope is the same as think outside the box for all practical purposes - both just mean expand your thinking process so you are entertaining concepts beyond those you have previously entertained. Those who can already are. Those who can't never will.

It's all grist for the WOO Lords of Management Seminars.:jaw-dropp :jaw-dropp

[fuelair]

I think [the use of] pushing the envelope dates back to attempting to surpass the speed of sound. Attempting anything right on the edge of the impossible.

The one I hate is Synergy.
But you need synergy to push the envelope so you can mine the opportunities for grasping low-hanging fruit 110% of the time whilst using the remainder to think outside the box of fish from that fish market video they made you watch in another management seminar!!!:D :jaw-dropp

[Mobyseven]

I find 'facilitate' is a word that can really separate people out into 'wanker' and 'nice'.

I used to do a lot of work for youth services in my town. They once held a seminar for their workers (not for me) and the old head of the youth drop-in area and her replacement had to work together.

The old head of the area is lovely - now has a much better job and a family - and when I was talking about it to her afterwards she said, "Ugh. So much of it was common sense or just wanky."

The new head is useless. Couldn't organise a piss up in a pub, and because she's in charge she just expects everyone to do her work for her. I asked her how the seminar was...

"Really good. Most of our time was spent learning to better facilitate our time and communication."

[The Atheist]

I think I agree with both of you (Charlie and T.A.) on "proactive", somewhat.

I think it's over-used, and I sometimes wonder if the user has the basic understanding of what the word means. It's become a mantra much like "sees opportunities, not problems". So that extent, I think Charlies'* got a point.

However, T.A. has it precisely right. It's got a very specific meaning and I find that there's no other single word that can be used in its place. If there was one, I'd use it... but just because, as I said, proactive is over-used.

Plus - it's just not a nice word. It kind of grates on me.

Agree on the usage, but that could equally apply to lots of words we use by default. I'm pretty sure that one's here to stay, although some twat will no doubt think up a new one. I'd use "effectual" and "ineffectual" if I thought more than 10% of people would know what I meant.

I frequently see job postings by software companies that "manage relationships", "help clients gain market power", "implement next-generation technologies", etc. etc. They sometimes go on for several pages without giving the slightest hint as to what it is they actually do.

I'd go with all but "managing relationships". That a very helpful term and as with proactive, there aren't too many comments which are as useful to describe a job which involves, .. um... managing relationships! Much, much, much better to tell someone that they will be working with customers one on one than suggesting they will be "strategising at the customer interface*".

I find 'facilitate' is a word that can really separate people out into 'wanker' and 'nice'.

I used to do a lot of work for youth services in my town.

(bolding mine)

I'd say that's the one I hate the most - facilitate. Worst word ever. Quite frequently facilitates heart attack, stroke and apoplexy, maybe.

I frequently ask why it is that anything which is even remotely quasi-, or governmental, uses that term in every sentence.

I suspect it's one of those which results from trying to be PC in language, that whenever there is the slightest doubt about the correctness of the word to be used, use "facilitate" instead.

*Using nouns as verbs gains extra points in the management-speak courses at local polytechs, I am quite convinced.

[Modified]

I'd go with all but "managing relationships". That a very helpful term and as with proactive, there aren't too many comments which are as useful to describe a job which involves, .. um... managing relationships!

That would be fine if they explained what sort of relationships they manage and in what way they manage them, but they never do.

[Modified]

I find 'facilitate' is a word that can really separate people out into 'wanker' and 'nice'.

It's not a buzzword, but "unacceptable" pretty much does that for bosses or customers.

[HawaiiBigSis]

The one that's very annoying to me is "orientate," and I'm seeing it in common usage too, although my first encounters were in business context. "Orient" is a perfectly good word, and means exactly the same as whatever people are trying to communicate with their extended version.

I also immensely dislike "at the end of the day" and "my name is on the door" -- and in fact, one of the heros at the large corporation that employed me for over a decade put out a video which he titled "At The End Of The Day, My Name Is On The Door." It always made me wonder whose name was on the door in the morning?

[The Atheist]

That would be fine if they explained what sort of relationships they manage and in what way they manage them, but they never do.

Well, it hasn't been made self-explanatory in the rest of the piece, then yes, the writer needs a good kick in the goolies.

[The Atheist]

The one that's very annoying to me is "orientate," and I'm seeing it in common usage too, although my first encounters were in business context. "Orient" is a perfectly good word, and means exactly the same as whatever people are trying to communicate with their extended version.

Agree. Pople should leave their orientation for sex.

I also immensely dislike "at the end of the day" and "my name is on the door" -- and in fact, one of the heros at the large corporation that employed me for over a decade put out a video which he titled "At The End Of The Day, My Name Is On The Door." It always made me wonder whose name was on the door in the morning?

There's an excellent counter to that. When someone uses it during a conversation, every time it's uttered, swiftly add in a one of the following: "the next day starts" "the sun goes down", or devise own. Guaranteed cure in one conversation.

[Alphaman]

The word that really bugs me is "buzzword" -- it grates like fingernails on a chalkboard. Just what is the etymology of that word, anyways?

[Foolmewunz]

The word that really bugs me is "buzzword" -- it grates like fingernails on a chalkboard. Just what is the etymology of that word, anyways?

Actually, that's an excellent point, but I think it's why I chose it as the thread title. It's an irritating word describing the use of irritating words or expressions.

(I'd like to know the etymology on it, too. I'm at work, hoping that damned A380 ((see Forum Community)) will make another fly-by, and have a lunch appointment, so don't know if I'll find time to dig into it. If anyone comes up with it, I'd be curious to know.)

[fuelair]

The word that really bugs me is "buzzword" -- it grates like fingernails on a chalkboard. Just what is the etymology of that word, anyways?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/buzzword

also wikipedia

www.dogpile.com is our friend

[The Atheist]

The word that really bugs me is "buzzword" -- it grates like fingernails on a chalkboard. Just what is the etymology of that word, anyways?

Wow!

You used up your whole annual posting allowance to let us know?

You really do hate it, eh?

:bgrin:

[jsfisher]

The one I hate is Synergy.

That tops my list, too, although usually in the form "synergistic."

[Terry]

Push the Envelope - just what the H does it mean?


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/13/PerformanceEnvelope.gif/644px-PerformanceEnvelope.gif
Flight envelope

[Foolmewunz]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/13/PerformanceEnvelope.gif/644px-PerformanceEnvelope.gif
Flight envelope


Oh, I'm glad we cleared that up!

It's my thread and there will be no math! (And we'll grade on a curve, anyway!)

[zooterkin]

Agreed on the previous comments regarding proactive. I don't like the word, but I haven't found a good replacement for the opposite of reactive.

The phrase that my company uses a lot recently, but which I have no clue as to what it means, is go to market. This is used as if it refers to a new idea, but as far as I can tell it just means selling things.

[rjh01]

Eh?

Not sure whether you might be having a jape here, but proactive is good, being the opposite of reactive. Do you want a sales rep who sits at his desk waiting for customers to call (reactive), or one who gets out there and makes it happen (proactive)?

If you have a more succinct way of putting it, let me know - I use it all the time!

Another word that can be used instead of proactive sometimes is preemptive (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/preemptive). See definition 3b.
Undertaken or initiated to deter or prevent an anticipated, usually unpleasant situation or occurrence: The two companies organized a preemptive alliance against a possible takeover by another firm.

One thing about the English language there are many words that either mean the same or similar to other words.

[The Atheist]

Another word that can be used instead of proactive sometimes is preemptive (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/preemptive). See definition 3b.


One thing about the English language there are many words that either mean the same or similar to other words.

But not that one.

The key bit is here:

prevent an anticipated, usually unpleasant situation or occurrence

There are two elements there which don't work: the anticipation and the unpleasantness. "Pro-active" in business is not about anticipated business, it's about potential business, for which one needs to not sit on one's arse, but go forth amongst one's customers and potential customers, for a pleasant outcome (fat bonus cheque).

It's a great word, embrace it!

:bgrin:

[rjh01]

I just query if the word proactive is used correctly by The Atheist. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proactive

The word proactive was originally coined by the psychiatrist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychiatrist) Victor Frankl (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Frankl) in his 1946 book Man's Search for Meaning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man%27s_Search_for_Meaning) to describe a person who took responsibility for his or her life, rather than looking for causes in outside circumstances or other people. Much of this theory was formed in Nazi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi) concentration camps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentration_camps) where Frankl lost his wife, mother, father and family, but decided that even under the worst circumstances, people can make and find meaning (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meaning).
The term was popularized in the business (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business) press in Stephen Covey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Covey)'s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_Habits_of_Highly_Effective_People). Though he used the word in Frankl's original sense, the word has come to mean "to act before a situation becomes a source of confrontation or crisis" vs. after the fact. It is frequently misused to mean simply "active" the opposite of passive.

[zooterkin]

I just query if the word proactive is used correctly by The Atheist. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proactive

The Atheist is using the word in the way it is used in business. The pre-existing meaning that you quote is one of the reasons I don't like using it.

[slyjoe]

Paradigm shift.

[fuelair]

Agreed on the previous comments regarding proactive. I don't like the word, but I haven't found a good replacement for the opposite of reactive.

The phrase that my company uses a lot recently, but which I have no clue as to what it means, is go to market. This is used as if it refers to a new idea, but as far as I can tell it just means selling things.

http://www.terrygold.com/t/2005/01/buzzword_bingo_.html

it appears to mean get it out there and (as you say) sell it/see how it does.


There are few new ideas, mostly just old ones gold trimmed, pumped up in price and vomited out in hopes something will be accomplished (who moved my cheese and tossed my fish away?).

[The Atheist]

P*****gm shift.

Thanks!

That's just the last straw.

Happily abusing my powers as Grammar Tyrant, the word "p*****gm" is henceforth deleted.

[The Atheist]

it appears to mean get it out there and (as you say) sell it/see how it does.

Uh, well no.

"Seeing how it does" would be reactive.

"Getting out and selling" is pro-active.

[Foolmewunz]

In terms of cube-farms and the world of Dilbertville, pro-active actually has a lot of its original meaning.

True, it's used by a lot of the seminar and team-building* types as a sales and marketing mantra, but it's also used in the sense of spotting potential problems and fixing the system or process before said problem occurs.

*Team-building - the words aren't so bad, the concept doesn't work, though, unless you find ways to do it during the work day and in the work environment.

Paradigm. How about we make it mandatory to pronounce the g? I've seen people reading another person's Powerpoint and pronounce it, with a soft g. Since then I alway use it sarcastically, but with a hard g - "par a dig em". Properly sold, we could make it the new "irregardless".

[The Atheist]

Paradigm. How about we make it mandatory to pronounce the g? I've seen people reading another person's Powerpoint and pronounce it, with a soft g. Since then I alway use it sarcastically, but with a hard g - "par a dig em". Properly sold, we could make it the new "irregardless".

Not bad. How about a step further and lose the pronunciation on the first "a" while we donate it to the "g", to give "pra-dig'-em", with a nice emphasis on the "dig"?

I really think "paradigm" is a word which has no relevant uses, there always being a far better alternative.

Sell the "dime" in "paradigm"!

[drkitten]

The one that's very annoying to me is "orientate," and I'm seeing it in common usage too, although my first encounters were in business context. "Orient" is a perfectly good word, and means exactly the same as whatever people are trying to communicate with their extended version.



I think you're just objecting to Briticisms. "Orient" is not a perfectly good word in the UK (although most educated Brits can at least understand American, even if they don't speak it and don't like listening to it). But the correct verb on the eastern side of the Atlantic is "orientate."

I'll bet you don't like "aluminium," either....

[Ohmer]

Nope, sorry, that word has no business in the English language. :D

~~ Paul

At Home Depot this weekend, my cashier had a big white button the said "I am Empowered" on it. It was one of the purest examples of buzzword nonsense I have ever seen. :mad: The sad thing is, the idiot who thought that button was a good idea probably makes a lot more money than I do. I really felt like Home Depot corporate was insulting my intelligence.

I almost told her that she may be empowered, but she better not try to stop a thief if she sees one.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=91780

[Macoy]

This is a report on how Heinz have scarpered from Zimbabwe after 25 years, having been ostensibly bought out by the government owned company "Cottco":

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6977109.stm


"This acquisition will add critical mass to the company while allowing the company to diversify from its traditional revenue streams and operating risks," said Pius Manamike, Cottco's company secretary.

Where do execs learn this stuff? Are there schools that teach pseudospeak?

[The Atheist]

That one reminds of another piece of stoopidity around at the moment.

Companies are currently often wont to describe their areas of operations as "channels".

When candidates tell me they've been working in "channel marketing", I ask which part of the Cook Strait Ferry Service they were working in.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Agreed on the previous comments regarding proactive. I don't like the word, but I haven't found a good replacement for the opposite of reactive.
Sweet Jesus in a cubicle! Give me any sentence that uses proactive and I can reword it so it doesn't sound like so much postmodern bizspeak. :D

~~ Paul

[The Atheist]

Sweet Jesus in a cubicle! Give me any sentence that uses proactive and I can reword it so it doesn't sound like so much postmodern bizspeak. :D

~~ Paul


Or, as suggested, you could come up with a simile which performs the same duty as "pro-active", and describes the opposite to "reactive" in a business sense.


Here's an example for you:

The job will require you to pro-actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.

Your turn...

[jsfisher]

Here's an example for you:
The job will require you to pro-actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.


"You will be expected to sell new stuff to existing customers."

[The Atheist]

"You will be expected to sell new stuff to existing customers."

Absolutely not!

That would indicate to prospective applicants that it is an order-taking job.

I don't need one of them and they get short shrift when I'm looking for someone to be pro-actively selling to the clientele.

(not to mention, there are no new services involved)

[jsfisher]

Oops, my mistake. "You will be expected to sell existing stuff to existing customers."

That doesn't leave much room for marketing to be creative, though.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

The job will require you to pro-actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.
The job will require you to actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.


"You will be expected to sell new stuff to existing customers."


That would indicate to prospective applicants that it is an order-taking job.
It would? If so, then why wouldn't you say "The job will require you to take orders for the company's services from an established clientele"? To sell means to sell actively, not just take orders.

Maybe I've missed something and the world now has reactive sellers? :D

~~ Paul

[Foolmewunz]

The occupation that dares not speak its name: Sales

We have Account Executives in most industries. They're not executives, and they don't have any accounts (don't have any accounts... yet .... when they start the job).

In my company we call them Business Development Managers.

I guess Account Executives and Business Devlopment Managers need to be pro-active. Probably if we could find some decent Sales personnel, they'd be willing to just "get out there and find a way to actively sell the company's products to existing and potential clients".

I argue with people about this wolf in alpaca's clothing all the time. Don't they realize how many CEOs and self-made entrepreneurs came up through the sales and marketing channel?

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

The following gobbledegook arrived in my daughter's end-of-summer packet from school:

We are pleased to collaborate with you in a thoughtful effort to have every child experience the intrinsic rewards of learning and the extrinsic value of becoming well educated.
I have highlighted in bold the words you should avoid.

~~ Paul

[Foolmewunz]

I put this in the Favorite Unusual Words thread in FC, then realized it also belongs here. I get weird looks when I use it because most people assume symbiotic to be more akin to parasitic, but it really is more appropriate for business use than syngergy or synergistic.


symbiotic*

*I use this in business to replace the dreaded synergies. It's much more appropriate in commerce to refer to a symbiotic relationship, rather than synergistic one, IMHO.

[The Atheist]

The job will require you to actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.

Nope, fails miserably as well.

It's impossible to be inactive and sell, but it's quite possible to actively sell, while being purely reactive (see below), but pro-actively selling requires you to actually make the play.

It would? If so, then why wouldn't you say "The job will require you to take orders for the company's services from an established clientele"? To sell means to sell actively, not just take orders.

Maybe I've missed something and the world now has reactive sellers? :D

~~ Paul

Well, only if you've never been into a shop in your life and bought something.

Selling, while being purely reactive is easy. Cigarette companies and Coca-Cola are the two best examples - their sales reps take orders and do merchandising, a purely reactive sales job.

A pro-active sales rep will be researching his customers' buying patterns, their business, their sales and his competitors to embark on a plan to sell more to those customers.

Have another go.

[The Atheist]

The occupation that dares not speak its name: Sales

We have Account Executives in most industries. They're not executives, and they don't have any accounts (don't have any accounts... yet .... when they start the job).

In my company we call them Business Development Managers.

Believe it or not, this is actually driven by the people in those jobs. Sales reps get business cards and if that card says "Sales rep" or "Consultant" it doesn't have the same ring as "Sales Manager", "Business Development Manager" or other euphemisms. Salespeople are crap artists by occupation and lifestyle (the good ones, anyway) and it's an essential sop to their egos to have "manager" on the business card. I could give you too many examples to count of people who wouldn't apply for a job which was advertised as "Sales Rep". Only last year I had a bloke applying for an excellent job with the world's #1 engineering company, but their culture is to call a spade a spade and the job title was "Sales Engineer".

This idiot turned it down for less money, working for a dodgy bucket-shop instead of an international icon, swapping unlimited career prospects for none at all, simply because he was appointed to said bucket-shop as "National Sales Manager". The entire area of the company he was national sales manager for, of course, consisting of him and him alone.

The GM of the company he turned down and I shared a few belly laughs a couple of weeks ago when he came crawling back and was told where to go.

Karma. Love it.

I guess Account Executives and Business Devlopment Managers need to be pro-active. Probably if we could find some decent Sales personnel, they'd be willing to just "get out there and find a way to actively sell the company's products to existing and potential clients".

The trouble with good salespeople is that most of them would make great Amway recruiters as well - they swallow the worst-imaginable dross and spew it out at length. I'd be surprised to find many really good salespeaople who didn't cling to at least several paranormal beliefs. They generally need to be told where to go, what to say and how to CLOSE THE FLAMING DEAL!

I argue with people about this wolf in alpaca's clothing all the time. Don't they realize how many CEOs and self-made entrepreneurs came up through the sales and marketing channel?

I'd take that bet.

Pick an entrepreneur who came up through sales *WHAT?*? Most salespeople are too rash to be good businessmen/women. Lots of them become very successful, sure, but I reckon if you look at the real top echelon - say 1-5% of CEO and entrepreneurs, you'd find a low proportion of people who started out selling.

[jimbob]

What does it mean?


The job will require you to pro-actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.

Seek out and develop new sales from the existing customers customer base?

Why the limitation to existing customers?

We have an approved supplier list, but I am not aware of an approved customer list, except for items under export control.

Acting as a marketing pathfinder, you will fearlesly search for new sales opportunities in the places where we already have some sales and have looked before?

keep ringing up the same people until they buy?

or does it mean "promote sales by working closely with clients, identifying opportunities for further sales of our services"?

I think pro-active is meaningless here, as the reverse just sounds silly.

[The Atheist]

What does it mean?

Well, I've tried pretty hard to cover that:

A pro-active sales rep will be researching his customers' buying patterns, their business, their sales and his competitors to embark on a plan to sell more to those customers.

It means getting out and making it happen.

Seek out and develop new sales from the existing customers customer base?

Why the limitation to existing customers? (bolding mine)

It wouldn't be limited to current customers, that's just an example of a job ad.

The bolded bit covers it, but at six words instead of one, you've just added 20% to the advertising cost. That's YOUR bonus that's coming out of!

or does it mean "promote sales by working closely with clients, identifying opportunities for further sales of our services"?

That's good, too, but at 15 words replacing one, your bonus cheque is looking like it might be an invoice!

I think pro-active is meaningless here, as the reverse just sounds silly.

Unpro-active?

:)

[Wolfman]

Well, we tend to use the terms "proactive" and "reactive" together in my company's sales and marketing. In our usage, "reactive" sales would be waiting for the client to come to us, or taking a passive stance. "Proactive" sales would be identifying the most likely clients/customers ourselves, and then getting out and selling to those customers.

Considering that sales are generally quite competitive, with several different versions of a similar product available to any client/customer, the "proactive" approach is the only one that makes much sense (unless you either have a complete monopoly, or an incredibly strong reputation and brand image) outside of a retail setting. You can't afford to sit around waiting for the clients to come to you; you have to not only get out there, but you have to convince them to buy your product instead of any competitor's product.

This, in turn, means anticipating their questions and their needs, and being prepared. Again, the "reactive" salesperson waits until a question is asked, then tries to find the answer; or waits until they find out what the client's needs are, and then tries to find a way to tailor their pitch to that need. The "proactive" salesperson has already anticipated their questions, and answers them before they are asked; and tailors each presentation in advance to the specific customer's anticipated needs.

Proactive sales pitch: appeals to the client/customer's needs directly, and answers most/all of the questions they will have. Remainder of discussion focuses more on finalizing the sale, rather than on explaining the product and answering questions. For example, the computer salesman who goes to a large company and tries to convince them to buy 100 new computers.

Reactive sales pitch: a generally generic pitch that covers the basic facts, and then is modified based on the client's feedback and responses during the presentation. Presentation is (hopefully) shorter, but much more time is spent in expanding on and explaining points not clarified in the original presentation, rather than on actually closing the sale. For example, the computer salesman who works in a computer store and sells individual units to walk-in customers for whom he has no background knowledge.

Others will have other meanings/interpretations for these terms, but for our purposes, this works quite well. And while I will admit that the words "proactive" and "reactive" get rather over-used in our company, they are also absolutely essential concepts. Chinese sales staff tend to be very, very reactive (a legacy of the previous state-owned enterprise system in China), so it is necessary to stress the difference, and push for a more proactive approach to sales and marketing.

[Wolfman]

A quick note here...the terms "proactive" and "reactive" would, in my opinion, be somewhat relative. In the examples I gave above, the computer salesman who is selling to a corporate client is more proactive than the computer salesman working in a retail computer shop.

However, a salesman in a computer shop can also be proactive -- they can do research on their products in advance, they can anticipate questions and have good answers prepared, etc. Most importantly, the proactive salesperson in such a situation will not simply start describing the computer...they will start by asking questions about specifically what the customer needs, what they will be using the computer for, and then tailor their responses to that.

In my opinion, the "proactive" approach will almost always be the superior approach. However, salespeople must also be able to be "reactive", in order to handle those occasional situations where something entirely unexpected happens, and it turns out that what you have prepared is not suitable to the specific situation.

I find that with my Chinese staff, they tend to be weak (until adequately trained) in being proactive, in anticipating client needs and preparing in advance. But they are also far better at handling unexpected situations and thinking on their feet. So I'd say that ideally you'd want some sort of balance between the two.

[rjh01]

In the context above what is the difference between cold calling (http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cold+Calling)and proactive?

[The Atheist]

In the context above what is the difference between cold calling (http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cold+Calling)and proactive?

Easy. Cold calling is simply contacting people who have no existing business relationship with the seller. Cold calling is usually a part of any pro-active sales job, but is only a small part, unless you're selling photocopiers or vacuum cleaners, where it's all about cold calling.

[Wolfman]

In the context above what is the difference between cold calling (http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Cold+Calling)and proactive?
Easy. Cold calling is simply contacting people who have no existing business relationship with the seller. Cold calling is usually a part of any pro-active sales job, but is only a small part, unless you're selling photocopiers or vacuum cleaners, where it's all about cold calling.
Absolutely. In my company, for example, around 20% of our business comes from cold-calling; 30% from referrals; and 50% from repeat customers. But being "proactive" applies equally to all three categories.

Cold-calling is pro-active insomuch as it is not waiting for customers to come to you; but is also more reactive, in that it is more difficult to anticipate an individual customer's needs and questions in advance. Referrals probably require the most aggressively proactive approach, as you have the opportunity to find out more information about the client before you meet them, and make the best possible first impression. In my experience, for repeat customers, the focus is more on anticipating what your competition may do to try to steal your client away from you, and taking pro-active measures to minimize that risk. (Please note that I am talking specifically about the training industry here; other industries will probably have very different figures and approaches)

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

It's impossible to be inactive and sell, but it's quite possible to actively sell, while being purely reactive (see below), but pro-actively selling requires you to actually make the play.
But selling actively is selling proactively. Selling passively is order-taking, which isn't selling at all. The problem really must be that passive order-taking has become known as selling. Obviously the world of the salesperson has become too easy. :D

Another problem here is that proactive selling is actually impossible, since proactive means "in anticipation of." So selling proactively would mean to sell something to somebody before they actually need it. I suppose that's what good salespeople endeavor to do.


"Proactive" sales would be identifying the most likely clients/customers ourselves, and then getting out and selling to those customers.
No, that's "active" sales. Proactive sales would be bothering the crap out of your customers to buy stuff before they need it.

There are already two perfectly good words: passive and active. We don't need proactive here. Make it go away.

"Oh my gosh, don't just drive actively. You must anticipate every curve and drive proactively."

~~ Paul

[Wolfman]

But selling actively is selling proactively. Selling passively is order-taking, which isn't selling at all. The problem really must be that passive order-taking has become known as selling. Obviously the world of the salesperson has become too easy. :D

Another problem here is that proactive selling is actually impossible, since proactive means "in anticipation of." So selling proactively would mean to sell something to somebody before they actually need it. I suppose that's what good salespeople endeavor to do.

No, that's "active" sales. Proactive sales would be bothering the crap out of your customers to buy stuff before they need it.

There are already two perfectly good words: passive and active. We don't need proactive here. Make it go away.

"Oh my gosh, don't just drive actively. You must anticipate every curve and drive proactively."

~~ Paul
A nice response, Paul...but rather completely ignores everything I said.

You equate "active" with "proactive", and make its opposite "passive". However, if you read my post, you'll find that my argument is completely different. I contrast "proactive" and "reactive". Under your definition ("active" and "passive"), what I term as "reactive" could be both passive and active.

Let me illustrate.

I run a company that does corporate training, and I personally specialize in corporate culture and cross culture consulting. We have a new potential client that I am meeting with to try to sell them my product. Now, this is by definition "active" sales. I'm not just sitting there writing and order. I'm going out and selling my product, and competing with other vendors who are trying to sell their products. This is in no way a "done deal".

How, I have two approaches with I can take.

One is the "reactive" approach. That is, I prepare a basic, fairly generic presentation about my company's services, and what we can offer. I am then prepared, after I have finished that presentation, to field specific questions that the client may have, and to identify more clearly the specific uses they will have for my product. It is "reactive" because the majority of what I will say (answers to client questions, developing strategy based on client needs, etc.) is done after I've done my presentation, as a reaction to their specific questions.

The other is the "proactive" approach. I do a lot of research in advance, I find out as much information as possible about the company's current situation, why they are interested in our company's services, and what type of results they are looking for. Based on that, I develop a presentation that addresses those specific issues. I also do my best, based on this, to anticipate the questions that they are going to ask, and include the answers to those questions in my presentation -- so they will never need to ask them. By the time I'm done the presentation, if I've done a good job, most of their questions and concerns have already been addressed, and we can focus instead on finalizing the contract.

This has nothing to do with being "passive" or "active"; both styles are "active". In my experience, by far the majority of sales presentations follow the former (reactive) style; but the latter (proactive) style consistently results in more sales.

[drkitten]

You equate "active" with "proactive", and make its opposite "passive". However, if you read my post, you'll find that my argument is completely different. I contrast "proactive" and "reactive". Under your definition ("active" and "passive"), what I term as "reactive" could be both passive and active.

Another example, one that my students appreciate. Nearly every student needs a job of some sort after graduation, except for the lucky few that have (through circumstance or fortune) already been placed in a summer or intern position that offers them a full-time job. They -- and only they --- have the luxury of a "passive" job search. Wait for an offer and then say "yes."

Most of my students do an "active" but "reactive" job search; they go looking through the various help-wanted ads, see who's hiring, and then apply for the jobs advertised appropriately. The more sophisticated ones will also network with family and friends to see who is hiring before the jobs get to HR if possible.

A few will actually engage in a "proactive" job search, where they attempt to persuade companies to create new jobs for them. They will target specific companies, learn what that company needs, and then try to tailor a package specific to some need they identified of the company, often before the company even realized that they had that need. It's much more work, but it usually results in better jobs.

[ImaginalDisc]

I just mentally translate from Bureaucrat into English.

"At this point in time" = "Now"
Ex: "We must update our shipping software at this point in time."

"Facilitate" = "Help"
Ex: "You're in luck. Bob's experience means he can facilitate."

"Synergize" = "Do nothing"
Ex: "Bi-Weekly hour-long meetings will get us synergized."

"Revitalize" = "Start working"
Ex: "We have fallen behind other deparments in output, and must revitalize."

"Reorganize" = "Fire"
Ex: "The new CEO wants to reorganize the previous staff."

"Reassess" = "Assess (for the first time)"
Ex: "Because we didn't understand the field as well in the past, and built our strategy on poor data, we need to reassess our facts."

"Going forward" = "Doing" (Alternately, "forward" can be dropped entirely.)
Ex: "We're making excellent progress on the product relase and things are going forward well."

"Transition" and "Flowchart" are nouns, not verbs, and "React" is a verb, not a noun. Why do people mess those up, deliberately?

[blobru]

Playboy's Unabashed Dictionary {in seminar-speak}

Sexual Perversion: global vanguard paradigm shift from pushing the envelope to thinking outside the box...

:bunpan

[Modified]

Another example, one that my students appreciate. Nearly every student needs a job of some sort after graduation, except for the lucky few that have (through circumstance or fortune) already been placed in a summer or intern position that offers them a full-time job. They -- and only they --- have the luxury of a "passive" job search. Wait for an offer and then say "yes."

Most of my students do an "active" but "reactive" job search; they go looking through the various help-wanted ads, see who's hiring, and then apply for the jobs advertised appropriately. The more sophisticated ones will also network with family and friends to see who is hiring before the jobs get to HR if possible.

A few will actually engage in a "proactive" job search, where they attempt to persuade companies to create new jobs for them. They will target specific companies, learn what that company needs, and then try to tailor a package specific to some need they identified of the company, often before the company even realized that they had that need. It's much more work, but it usually results in better jobs.

As Paul pointed out, the most common meaning of "proactive", which is quite different from the original meaning, includes anticipation or preemption. Doing a job search because you have reason to believe you will soon be fired from your current job would be proactive, waiting until you were fired would be reactive. A method of job searching couldn't really be described as proactive by that definition. But it doesn't surprise me that the meaning is changing or expanding as seems to be indicated by the discussion here. The usual purpose of the word has not changed, and that purpose is to sound like you have a plan and know what you're talking about without providing any specifics.

[drkitten]

As Paul pointed out, the most common meaning of "proactive", which is quite different from the original meaning, includes anticipation or preemption. Doing a job search because you have reason to believe you will soon be fired from your current job would be proactive, waiting until you were fired would be reactive. A method of job searching couldn't really be described as proactive by that definition.

Er, no. You're not paying attention to what is anticipated.

A reactive job search (in the example I gave) requires potential employers to identify their needs and present them for job searchers to respond to (via want ads, for example).

A proactive job search requires the job seeker to anticipate the employer's needs, ideally before the employer has even recognized and articulated them.

The usual purpose of the word has not changed, and that purpose is to sound like you have a plan and know what you're talking about without providing any specifics.

... which is appropriate if you're talking about high-level generalities. I do have a plan, and I do know what I'm talking about -- as a general strategy. I can, for example, recommend that my students job-search "proactively" without needing to get into specifications of which companies they might look at and which needs they might identify. This is generally an advantage, since my students have sufficiently varied interests that they won't look for the same things or at the same companies. But the needs of Google are of course different from the needs of Citibank, Honda, or Pfitzer.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

A nice response, Paul...but rather completely ignores everything I said.
Sorry, I wasn't really responding too seriously. I'm still treating this as a funny thread.


The other is the "proactive" approach. I do a lot of research in advance, I find out as much information as possible about the company's current situation, why they are interested in our company's services, and what type of results they are looking for. Based on that, I develop a presentation that addresses those specific issues. I also do my best, based on this, to anticipate the questions that they are going to ask, and include the answers to those questions in my presentation -- so they will never need to ask them. By the time I'm done the presentation, if I've done a good job, most of their questions and concerns have already been addressed, and we can focus instead on finalizing the contract.
Gotcha. Now that is proactive, even according to the usual meaning of the term.


A few will actually engage in a "proactive" job search, where they attempt to persuade companies to create new jobs for them. They will target specific companies, learn what that company needs, and then try to tailor a package specific to some need they identified of the company, often before the company even realized that they had that need. It's much more work, but it usually results in better jobs.
Yup, that sounds proactive, too.

Okay, it makes me gag, but proactive is in. As long as you use it carefully, not just to mean active. And as long as you don't say "proactively collaborate going forward."

~~ Paul

[Wolfman]

Sorry, I wasn't really responding too seriously. I'm still treating this as a funny thread.Paul, this is a very serious thread. Even the Grammar Tyrant is involved. We must define for all of humanity which terms they may or may not use, and in those cases where they may be used, how they may be used appropriately. Humor, laziness, or just a plain lacksidaisical attitude have no place within this thread.

[Hokulele]

Paul, this is a very serious thread. Even the Grammar Tyrant is involved. We must define for all of humanity which terms they may or may not use, and in those cases where they may be used, how they may be used appropriately. Humor, laziness, or just a plain lacksidaisical attitude have no place within this thread.


Put it all in a PowerPoint using flashy transitions, then I'll be interested.


NOT!

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Paul, this is a very serious thread. Even the Grammar Tyrant is involved. We must define for all of humanity which terms they may or may not use, and in those cases where they may be used, how they may be used appropriately. Humor, laziness, or just a plain lacksidaisical attitude have no place within this thread.
Since you have stated this without using any annoying bizterms, I shall take it seriously.

~~ Paul

[Wolfman]

Put it all in a PowerPoint using flashy transitions, then I'll be interested.Ooooh! Oh! Oh! My business partner bought the whole PowerPoint Transitions package from CrystalGraphics last year, and now there is not a single presentation from any of our staff that doesn't feature rockets taking off, rotating planets, 3-D rotating rings, and all sorts of other nifty stuff!

I've tried to emphasize to them that we're trying to make the client interested in the actual content of our presentations, not in nifty special effects. But thus far, my pleas have fallen upon deaf ears.

And now my partner wants to buy another package with all sorts of 3-D backgrounds and animations. I figure we'll soon reach the point where we'll need no actual content at all. We'll just treat our clients to a ten minute presentation of really cool graphic effects in PowerPoint, then say, "Now, if we could do that with PowerPoint, just think what we could do for your company!!"

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

I've tried to emphasize to them that we're trying to make the client interested in the actual content of our presentations, not in nifty special effects. But thus far, my pleas have fallen upon deaf ears.
That is because your fellow employees are being proactive regarding your clients' artistic desires.

~~ Paul

[Wolfman]

That is because your fellow employees are being proactive regarding your clients' artistic desires.

~~ PaulWell, I'm gonna' get reactive on their butts!

[drkitten]

That is because your fellow employees are being proactive regarding your clients' artistic desires.

Proactive does not imply intelligent, alas.... One could point at certain world leaders as examples.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Proactive does not imply intelligent, alas.... One could point at certain world leaders as examples.
Indeed. We need a word for that. Dumbactive?

~~ Paul

[jimbob]

but...

overlong powerpoint graphics say the same sort of thing as the geocities webpages with fifteen different typefaces.

"I have a shiny new toy and like playing with it" They are just a bit... naff.

My point about the proactively selluing was that if you are in sales as opposed to order taking that part should be part of your job description, and if you are on an incentive scheme, you would want to make it so.

"The ideal candidate will be retroactively and only tardily and minimally responsive to the most insistant customers' demands for sales information, for work with customers of the British Rail system".

If the job advert is being costed by word, you can save another word by missing out "proactive" altogether

Originally Posted by Job ad
The job will require you to retroactively pro-actively sell the company's services to an established clientele.

Does the above convey any less information? To me that now conveys a slight disdain for tautology.

[blobru]

My pet peeve with buzz words is not about what they mean but how much they mean.

For example, when someone needs to point out that it's better to plan ahead, "proactive" works fine. But so many people use the word as if it were some sort of magic spell, "PROACTIVE!" [cue spooky music -- wooOOoo], pronouncing it with a hyperthyroid gaze like they're cracking open their vault of secret wisdom to give you a peek, it's hard not to laugh.

I think buzz words are the root of a lot of business woo (or woo in general, cf: The Secret); some new technology's got buzz -- "everybody's talking about it, gottabe something to it, right?" -- and soon the buzz of new language -- proactive, paradigm, empower, committment, etc. -- drowns out the reality that nothing's changed except the way people talk about it. Not to overstate the objection, a really new business strategy deserves a new name and a little buzz; but when words get too much buzz they quickly lose touch with whatever they meant and cease to mean anything, except maybe another way to say "abracadabra" and ten "hail Mary"'s.

--> BAD JOKE WARNING (Category 5)

We all know Jesus had Peter as the "rock" on which to build His church, and Judas along because every good story needs a villain, but what did Jesus need the other ten apostles for?
To each give his two cents, because twenty cents worth is a "paradigm". Heh heh... :nope: sorry.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

What Blobru said (except for the joke).

~~ Paul

[Leif Roar]

but when words get too much buzz they quickly lose touch with whatever they meant and cease to mean anything, except maybe another way to say "abracadabra" and ten "hail Mary"'s.

The really depressing thing is that if you tried, you'd probably be able to get powerpointed ones to adopt "abracadabra" and "hail Mary"'s as business terms.

"Now, this business case would not have been feasible if not for the abracadabra factor, so we all need to stay focused on selling pro-actively and covering our hail Mary's."

[Wolfman]

The really depressing thing is that if you tried, you'd probably be able to get powerpointed ones to adopt "abracadabra" and "hail Mary"'s as business terms.

"Now, this business case would not have been feasible if not for the abracadabra factor, so we all need to stay focused on selling pro-actively and covering our hail Mary's."
Actually, "hail Mary" is already used; to do a hail mary, or throw a hail mary, means simply to try something without knowing what the results will be, and just hope for the best. Tends to be used only by Americans, as it is derived from football (to throw a hail mary pass). I've heard this used in business meetings on several different occasions, although it wouldn't be really common.

[Hokulele]

Actually, "hail Mary" is already used; to do a hail mary, or throw a hail mary, means simply to try something without knowing what the results will be, and just hope for the best. Tends to be used only by Americans, as it is derived from football (to throw a hail mary pass). I've heard this used in business meetings on several different occasions, although it wouldn't be really common.


No joke, I sat in a meeting once where the term "two point conversion" was used. A two point conversion is another American rules football term for a somewhat risky play that can earn an extra point if carried out successfully. No points at all are awarded for a failure. It was used in reference to an "all or nothing" gambit the company was about to undertake. The comment made sense in context of the meeting, but I was cringing with anticipation assuming it would be misused by the company in the future.

[jimbob]

Let's slam these nuts in the door...

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

If I ever hear "be the change" or any variant thereof, you're outta here.

~~ Paul

[The Atheist]

Oh, I have to use that!

Afternoon session, Sales Seminar...

"That concludes the presentation for today, aside from one final point.

We've explored how a pro-active sales rep can become successful and ensure a fat bonus cheque every quarter, but there is a way to even lift yourselves beyond the "successful" tag.

In every organisation, there comes a time when it benefits from the winds of change, sweeping through it, blowing away the dead wood, encouraging strong new shoots.

I ask, in closing, that you go back to your employers and be the change."

(please, with the 3-day suspension, don't forget to let me back after three days this time! Surely can't be worth more than 3 days, can it?)

Adios....

[Cello Man]

First off, I should declare that I work at an ad agency. Don't pile on me just yet. I just make the coffee, answer phones, keep computers running, and make sure the printers have paper. I'm not one of the evil geniuses behind these grand schemes, but I do hear a few terms in passing that strike me as linguistically questionable.

Impactful - This bastardized word was apparently cooked up by one of our clients.

Flavorfullness - Yet another client who came up with this. I guess the person who came up with this would call zooming in on a picture "embiggenation".

X-Treme - This term will be eliminated from the English lexicon if it's the last thing I ever do. Thankfully no one at my agency has used it in a campaign. My compadre Maddox sums up my feelings nicely. (NSFW language) http://tinyurl.com/ajy8e

[The Atheist]

I guess the person who came up with this would call zooming in on a picture "embiggenation".

I'm definitely going to fit that in somehow!

[Matt the Poet]

Anybody using the word 'action' as a verb. It's not just that the perfectly good english verb 'do' is available. It's also that it tends to provide weaselling room. 'I'll do that' is pretty unambiguous. 'I'll action that' means that you'll do it, or set in motion something that causes it to be done, or gets someone else to cause it to be done etc. etc. until the fact that it doesn't actually, you know, happen ceases to be your fault...

As an ex-biologist now working in the corporate(ish) world, I was horrified to come across the term 'Data DNA' recently. Apparently this is just a buzzword for 'metadata', generated from a vague and wildly incorrect notion of what DNA is or does. Made me come over all cromulent...

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

(please, with the 3-day suspension, don't forget to let me back after three days this time! Surely can't be worth more than 3 days, can it?)
We have decided that it is okay to use be the change in this thread only. You were this close, though.


Flavorfullness - Yet another client who came up with this. I guess the person who came up with this would call zooming in on a picture "embiggenation".
Of course they would:

http://www.acepilots.com/mt/2007/02/25/the-embiggenation-of-the-oscars/

~~ Paul

[Cello Man]

Damn. I always hate it when I think I have an original idea and someone's already beaten me to it.

[Ohmer]

Actually, "hail Mary" is already used; to do a hail mary, or throw a hail mary, means simply to try something without knowing what the results will be, and just hope for the best. Tends to be used only by Americans, as it is derived from football (to throw a hail mary pass). I've heard this used in business meetings on several different occasions, although it wouldn't be really common.

This is a hail Mary pass:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3ykWbu2Gl0

Doug Flutie taught us all that hail Maries work!

[Hammer_of_Thor]

Here is the "buzzword" that really
-makes my blood boil
-chaps my a**
-turns my crank
-makes me want to slap my mom

CLOSURE

[alfaniner]

Nearly all the words mentioned are on a 5x5 grid I keep near my desk, called "BS Bingo". I may have even copied it from somewhere here on the Forum. The premise being, in any meeting cross off the words as they are said. Getting 5 in a row "empowers" you to stand up and shout "BS!" (or a variant thereof).

However, I haven't seen leverage yet. This one grates on me when used as a verb, especially after having seen Battlefield Earth again (at least it was used as a noun there!)

[The Atheist]

We have decided that it is okay to use be the change in this thread only. You were this close, though.

I'll send you a tape of me using it!


http://www.acepilots.com/mt/2007/02/25/the-embiggenation-of-the-oscars/

~~ Paul

AAARRRRRRRRGHHHHH!

That made my left eyeball bleed.

[The Atheist]

Nearly all the words mentioned are on a 5x5 grid I keep near my desk, called "BS Bingo". I may have even copied it from somewhere here on the Forum. The premise being, in any meeting cross off the words as they are said. Getting 5 in a row "empowers" you to stand up and shout "BS!" (or a variant thereof).

Great plan!

However, I haven't seen leverage yet. This one grates on me when used as a verb, especially after having seen Battlefield Earth again (at least it was used as a noun there!)

Yeah, that's bad. The whole leverage thing is to be avoided, unless you're this guy (http://www.gizapyramid.com/wallington.htm).

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Anyone feel like leveraging some closure this evening?

~~ Paul

[Wolfman]

There is a "Mission Statement Generator (http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/games/career/bin/ms_verb.cgi)" at dilbert.com that covers all these different buzzwords quite effectively. Completely randomized results that inevitably sound like something that a brain-dead manager would say. A few examples:

We have committed to conveniently build effective infrastructures in order to efficiently negotiate resource-leveling intellectual capital while maintaining the highest standards

http://www.dilbert.com/images/clear_dot.gif
It's our responsibility to quickly initiate cutting edge technology as well as to synergistically network scalable content because that is what the customer expects

http://www.dilbert.com/images/clear_dot.gif
It's our responsibility to quickly initiate cutting edge technology as well as to synergistically network scalable content because that is what the customer expects

The customer can count on us to interactively build scalable technology to allow us to collaboratively create value-added infrastructures

[Dunstan]

Nearly all the words mentioned are on a 5x5 grid I keep near my desk, called "BS Bingo". I may have even copied it from somewhere here on the Forum. The premise being, in any meeting cross off the words as they are said. Getting 5 in a row "empowers" you to stand up and shout "BS!" (or a variant thereof).

However, I haven't seen leverage yet. This one grates on me when used as a verb, especially after having seen Battlefield Earth again (at least it was used as a noun there!)

IBM is running an ad campaign based on the premise that their services help you to "do" stuff instead of just talking about it; they're making fun of business buzzwords ("ideation"). One of the commercials features Buzzword Bingo, along the lines you describe.

If hatred of buzzwords is so mainstream that even IBM is jumping on board, there may be hope. Of course, this probably just means there will be a new set of buzzwords for eliminating buzzwords.

[jimbob]

www.despair.com

especially:

http://www.despair.com/motivation.html

[Tom Morris]

How about some real-world uses?

De Montfort University: Services for Business (http://www.dmu.ac.uk/partnerships/servicesforbusiness/index.jsp)
Bespoke and cutting edge solutions in a changing and fast paced environment.
De Montfort University values its relationship with the business community and strives to provide first class services to all its clients, from private, public and not-for-profit sectors, We pride ourselves on our unique approach, which blends academic rigour with practitioner-led expertise to respond to the needs of each individual client. Contact us today to discuss how De Montfort University can make a real difference to your organisation.
What have we here? Misplaced punctuation, and mounds of buzzword B.S. What exactly are we supposed to gather from this segment? What "solutions" - bespoke, cutting-edge or otherwise - am I going to get from the university?

The best example I saw a while back was a report from the Corus Group, a British metals company. They've changed it now - but it was a complete minefield of buzzwords and jargon. Having read it three times, I still had no idea what the business actually did. It provided "solutions" to it's "partners", and everyone was very excited about these "services". Exactly what sort of services or solutions they are are not explained.

Another bit of jargon I saw today: "step change" - a bit like a step function, but rather in a non-mathematical context. From what I can gather, it's basically a discontinuous change. You know, just like how we use the word "change" in our ordinary language.

"Building revenue streams" - you know, because a lot of streams are 'built'. And, of course, "make money" hasn't got nearly as many syllables.

"Persistence" is another one I see. There are a number of cases when I can see a valid use of this word - if one were talking about, oh, the challenges that an athlete faced in training for the Olympics, or maybe about relational databases. Corporate annual reports is not one of those cases.

What about this:
Accelerating sales growth is a key objective for (the company), as it is the ultimate driver of earnings growth and value creation for our shareholders.
Yes, a fairly simple equation that one - sell more stuff means more profit, means stock goes up in value. You would have thought that anyone who is reading the corporate annual report - either the executive board or the shareholders - would have probably figured out this fairly simple rule of business operation by now. Still, at least it's something reasonably well-defined like "shareholders" rather than "stakeholders".

Both persistence and 'accelerating' come from this blog entry (http://jargon-flogger.blogspot.com/2007/07/dear-shareholder.html). A definite 'subscribe', I say. One of the points he makes is that successful CEOs - the Steve Jobs' of the world etc. - speak very clearly and without jargon.

I don't particularly like the phrase "human resources" either. Quite what is wrong with personnel - except that people don't usually spell it right - is beyond me.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Bespoke ...
I don't even know what that word means.

~~ Paul

[Foolmewunz]

I don't even know what that word means.

~~ Paul

Ditto, and ditto, again! That's horrible coinage.

It's a verb. How are they using it? As a modifier, e.g. "bespoke solutions"?

[jimbob]

"Suits you sir".


I do know where it is appropriate, on Savile Row.

[Modified]

How about some real-world uses?

De Montfort University: Services for Business (http://www.dmu.ac.uk/partnerships/servicesforbusiness/index.jsp)

Classic. "We do stuff. Contact us if you need stuff done."

[The Atheist]

I don't even know what that word means.

~~ Paul

It's bicycle racing terminology - the "A" spokes are on the right hand side of the wheel and the "B" spokes are on the left.

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

It's bicycle racing terminology - the "A" spokes are on the right hand side of the wheel and the "B" spokes are on the left.
Facing which way?

~~ Paul

[Ben Tilly]

Paradigm shift.

Indeed. Particularly since it is used in a manner so contrary to what Kuhn's point was when he popularized the term. (Paradigms are valuable in large part because people don't try to give them up.)

[kmortis]

Facing which way?

~~ Paul

When you're sitting akimbo on the saddle.

[stilicho]

"Span of control" is one of my favourite buzzwords and an alternative pronunciation for the Slayer cover band "Slab of Limestone".

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

When you're sitting akimbo on the saddle.
Facing which way?

~~ Paul

[jimbob]

Facing which way?

~~ Paul

http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/stevebell/0,,2166642,00.html

[Thanz]

"Solutions", especially in the IT area. Everything you do or sell is a freakin' solution. Some guy who sells computers trying to convince me he sells "solutions". Ugh. You are pushing boxes, just like thousands of other businesses.

[jimbob]

Thanz,

just posted this on the corporate delusions thread, but maybe should also go here:

SAP faces $100m fraud claim from Waste Management Inc for failing to deliver on a buzzword-filled promise. (http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=181575&d=1025&dateformat=%25o-%25B)

or according to the WSJ quoted here (http://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/engineering-design-problems/2008/04/buzzwords-behind-100m-sap-laws-1.html#more):

"SAP AG is being sued for failing to deliver an "out-of-the-box integrated end-to-end solution that increases...effectiveness." Amazingly, the meaning of these buzzwords are at the heart of a claim seeking more than $100 million.

There is more to it than this, but

"SAP further represented that the software was an 'integrated end-to-end solution'. Unknown to Waste Management, this 'United States' version... was undeveloped, untested and defective."

A blog about it on Electronics Weekly's "Made By Monkeys" blog (http://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/engineering-design-problems/2008/04/buzzwords-behind-100m-sap-laws-1.html#more)

Our company "uses" SAP...

[bigred]

Anyone using any of these should be immediately shot:

pro-active
empower
can't see the forest for the trees
think outside the box
self-licking ice cream cone
stretch the envelope
core values
results-driven
goal-oriented
straw man (also a JREF fav!)
synergy/synergistic
right-sizing
leveraging
paradigm
peel back the onion (Lord knows using this can make me cry)
sidebar
offline (ie "we'll take that offline")
team-building
mentoring
run it up the flagpole
open-door policy

Finally a classic IMO:
http://professionalsuperhero.com/

[bigred]

Playboy's Unabashed Dictionary {in seminar-speak}

Sexual Perversion: global vanguard paradigm shift from pushing the envelope to thinking outside the box...

:bunpanLOL @ the bunny. Another classic. :)

[bigred]

PS how could I forget what is probably the trendiest one out there now: "business model."

[drkitten]

Anyone using any of these should be immediately shot:

Actually, a lot of the terms do have very useful meanings. The problem is that most people don't use the words correctly.

Cases in point:

proactive : has already been discussed upthread. It's very useful as an opposite to reactive, describing someone who actively creates a (hopefully profitable) situation. You usually want proactive salesmen who will create their own list of clients instead of just sitting and waiting for the phone to ring.

empower: again, "empowering" someone to perform a specific act is very useful, esp. if you're trying to streamline decision making. And it's near synonym "authorize" is not very useful, since "authorize" often comes with an implicit "in emergencies only, but not as a matter of course."

stretch the envelope : "the envelope" is a well-established term in almost any science where you're measuring the performance of a system as a region in abstract space.

results-driven, goal-oriented : again, very useful if you're trying to keep teams focused on some particular aspect of a project. For example, if you're Google and trying to speed up search, then a possible technology that will increase accuracy at the expense of speed is actually counterproductive to the immediate goal. A "goal-oriented" management will decide not to pursue.

leveraging : very useful term in finance, meaning "using other people's resources to my advantage." I.e, if I can borrow money at 3% and invest it returning 6%, I can use the "leverage" in the investment to make arbitrarily large amounts of money up to the limit of my credit. More generally, Google's search engine may give me leverage to a particular task that I need to do without having to develop search technology myself.

[bigred]

But the point is not the word/phrase itself being "bad" but rather the overuse and/or misuse of it, esp just to be trendy or sound more intelligent about something.

As for results-driven and goal-oriented, they are IMO with rare exception annoying if not idiotic to use because they state the obvious. ie who is NOT results-driven or goal-oriented in the business world? As for your example, mgt would not decide to persue that, period, if they possess working brains. And what kind of mgt is not "goal-oriented?"

[drkitten]

As for results-driven and goal-oriented, they are IMO with rare exception annoying if not idiotic to use because they state the obvious. ie who is NOT results-driven or goal-oriented in the business world?

Lots of people. An alternative to "results-oriented," for example, is "process-oriented," where the primary goal is to preserve a working system without developing lots of ad-hoc exceptions for marginal "successes." Most retail chains -- and, indeed, most large commercial enterprises -- are "process oriented" in that they don't typcially allow people at the lowest levels to make on-the-spot decisions.

As a simple example, if I wanted to buy 100 sandwiches for a meeting or something from the local deli, I could probably negotiate some sort of bulk discount with the guy running the place, because the "result" of making the sale is worth it to him. But I typically couldn't cut that kind of a deal with the local McD's.


As for your example, mgt would not decide to persue that, period, if they possess working brains.

Actually, I picked the example I did for a very good reason; the manager who made that particular decision probably no longer works for Google precisely because it's the wrong decision. It's particularly wrong in light of Google's resource allocation policy, which was designed specifically to "empower" people to to take non-"goal-oriented" activities and be rewarded for them, specifically because Google's long-term strengths require major resource investment in long-term research and product development.

And what kind of mgt is not "goal-oriented?"

Smart management. "Goal-oriented" management is typically short-sighted and lacks the ability to plan for long-term effect. It's almost the direct corrollary of "can't see the forest for the trees" and the antithesis of "think outside the box."

That's the real problem with the buzzwords. People use the buzzwords because they sound good, to the point where they forget that there are real alternatives to the buzzwords, some of which are even better.

"Empowerment" of employees, for example, sounds great until you realize that there's a corresponding loss of control for management; anything I'm empowered to do I will probably do in a way that you don't like. So what happens is that the words get bleached of meaning.....

[jimbob]

As drkitten has said, lot of these do have useful meanings.

Business model being one. Two words to say something that would take quite a lot otherwise.

"We want to understand whether we can compete in this market when using our particular business model".

"Step Change" seems to have been popularised by politicians recently.

I often think of politicans (of most* hues in the UK at least) suffering from "business envy" and thus trying cargo-cult management, and trying to impliment misunderstood business ideas (or simply talk about the buzwords) in an inappropriate context.

*ETA: Probably not Socialist Workers Party

[Humanoid]

Lately I've been doing a lot of web development. While I have nothing against the true usefulness of things like Search Engine Marketing, AJAX, Web 2.0 (more a paradigm than a "thing"), Search Engine Optimisation, etc etc etc (buzzwords are not hard to come by in this industry), I have to say I hate how customers are routinely ripped off by unscrupulous businesses offering say "SEO", charging a monthly subscription fee for "SEO", then adding like, 2 META tags to someones website which takes them all of what, say, a minute?

SEO can be very useful if done properly, but I hate the term, as much as I hate the "3 click policy".

The problem is, clients who don't really understand the technology but have read enough marketing BS actually EXPECT me to BS them. Many seem disappointed in that I refuse to BS people, and often the only time I see their faces light up is when I do drop a magic keyword, like say "ecommerce solution", because they think they understand what this means. I know it's bad for business but by telling people how it really is, that SEO isn't a magic bullet for top google results for instance, some take it well but others will opt for the guy in the shiny suit who gave his big SEO and SEM spiel, and his integrated ecommerce solution (his definition of integrated meaning you can log onto it through the web).

Sigh... Such is life.

[jimbob]

Bump:

Just caught up with the IET magazine for May

Great article about the language of business (http://kn.theiet.org/magazine/issues/0809/language-business.cfm)

Discusses Virgin's "winning" entry for the Golden Bull award by the planin English Campaign about a Virgin Trains for a letter about problems booking online

Moving forwards, we at Virgin Trains are looking to take ownership of the flow in question to apply our pricing structure, thus resulting in this journey search appearing in the new category-matrix format … I hope this makes the situation clear.

It mainly discusses why business jargon is used:
Some choice quotes to give a flavour of the article...

Keeping it brief[/i]
To "diarise" is quciker than to put something in a diary...
To "outlook" because I am also quick and not limited to slow paper and pencil and want to show how forward-looking and proactive I am... :duck:

I want to show how dynamic I am so I will verbize enery noun that I can.( maybe I should verbizeify?) and make it seem as if I am the alpha-male warrior/general (especially if I only have X chromosomes)...

The next heading is
[b]Lack of substance


“For HR to succeed it must re-equip itself through its own competence, capabilities, governance, delivery systems to enable managers to build the organisation capability needed to succeed.”

The striking thing about this is its air of desperation. If headless chickens could talk, this is what they’d sound like. Here we have language deployed by someone who has no idea what they’re trying to say, other than that it has to sound positive; accordingly, they’ve simply piled together a list of words that are unattached to their meaning, repetitive, wrongly punctuated and ungrammatical – all common features of the jargon-heavy statement. Grammar and punctuation, after all, have a specific function: they make plain the sense. But jargon is the enemy of sense, used in place of argument, not to bolster it. Applying grammar or punctuation here would be like erecting scaffolding around mist.

Ongoing positivisation

...And business language’s need for a positive outlook shows in its relentlessly upbeat nature. Being ‘good’ is no longer good enough: degrees of excellence now spiral all the way up to ‘paradigm-shifting’, just as all services become ‘solutions’, to underline a constant sense of achievement, of problems overcome. At the same time, bad things have to be downplayed, via widespread use of euphemism. Nobody needs reminding of the wealth of terms that have replaced the word ‘sacked’. With all information being filtered in this fashion, it’s no surprise that when businesses fail, it often seems to outsiders to have happened overnight. That’s because warning signs have effectively been censored; smothered under a blanket of positive noises.

[jsfisher]

I want to show how dynamic I am so I will verbize enery noun that I can.( maybe I should verbizeify?)


One doesn't verbize nor verbizeify anything. One verbs: "I want to show how dynamic I am so I will verb every noun I can." See how much cleaner that is, meaning-wise?

[jimbob]

True, I was obviously thinking about the current POTUS and several of his predecessors.

Sir Humphrey Appleby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_Humphrey_Appleby) managed to say nothing with far more elegance...

Sir Humphrey: Unfortunately, although the answer was indeed clear, simple, and straightforward, there is some difficulty in justifying assigning to it the fourth of the epithets you applied to the statement, inasmuch as the precise correlation between the information you communicated, and the facts insofar as they can be determined and demonstrated is such as to cause epistemological problems, of sufficient magnitude as to lay upon the logical and semantic resources of the English language a heavier burden than they can reasonably be expected to bear.

[maxfrost]

Back in the 80s, when "interface" was the key corporate buzzward, I worked for a Very Large Bank and ran across a job description in the weekly Career Opportunities: "Candidate will interfere with bank's clients and upper management." I applied, but didn't get the job because I obviously did not have the experience of getting into people's way as other, more qualified, candidates had.

[Wirelight]

Xtreme.

Everything nowadays must be extreme. My internet connection is the "extreme" package. Earlier today I bought some gum and it was "extreme ice". And yesterday my cousin was telling me about his "extreme" bike race.


Bleh

[jimbob]

Maxfrost and Wirelight, both fine examples of, what the article called, "Ongoing positivisation"...