December 5, 2012; Source: The Atlantic
We have discussed the distancing effect of nonprofit jargon in “What Nonprofits Can Learn from the Response Media Model,” a recent post in our new Now & Next column. Talking in tongues is irritating to constituents on any number of levels. It could make them believe that you do not inhabit the same planet that they do. It could make them believe that you are so insufferably arrogant that you’d rather show off than actually have a conversation. Finally, it could make people mistrust you because you are so obviously trying to obfuscate a point.
Sign up for our free newsletters
Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.
By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.
This problem is far from unique to our sector, as is evidenced by this paragraph issued by Citibank on the occasion of firing a bunch of people:
“Citigroup today announced a series of repositioning actions that will further reduce expenses and improve efficiency across the company while maintaining Citi’s unique capabilities to serve clients, especially in the emerging markets. These actions will result in increased business efficiency, streamlined operations and an optimized consumer footprint across geographies.”
In other words “we just fired 11,000 employees to save money.” Communication creates capital. Let’s try to talk straight. What’s the worst that can happen? –Ruth McCambridge
