Archive for June, 2008


Sustainability: More Than Green

Sustain: supply with sustenance, nourish.

Sustainable: of, relating to, or being a method of… using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged.

One key (and obvious) aspect of sustainable communications is being environmentally responsible. We urge clients to consume as few nonrenewable resources and as little energy as possible. Use electronic media rather than print whenever possible, for example. And when paper is unavoidable, print only what’s needed and use vegetable-based inks and paper with 100 percent post-consumer recycled content (the quality and choices are getting better all the time, and recycling no longer requires bleach or harmful chemicals).

But green materials are just one part of sustainable communications. Full sustainability requires honestly assessing your organization’s ability to support your programs over the long haul without budget strain or staff burnout, and developing communications that will serve you as well as possible for as long as possible.

For instance, a website overhaul that lasts several years is far more efficient than one that will need another update in a year. And your organization may be well served by a blog or newsletter, but only if you have the staff time and informational resources to keep it going long enough to gain traction.

Sustainability in any arena requires commitment. But it’s worth it: If you’re able to nourish your communications programs over the long term and keep them fresh and healthy, they’ll pay you back by helping sustain your business. 

First published in the September 2007 issue of Words That Work.

Credibility Counts. Do You Have It?

Your audience is uncritical and unquestioning—they’ll believe anything anyone tells them. They never notice problems—if you pretend nothing’s wrong, they’ll be happily oblivious. Plus, they’re semiliterate and ignorant of most facts, so carefully edited com­munications are lost on them.

Offended? You should be. Yet many organizations unknowingly deliver these insults—which means their audience is offended (or unimpressed and unpersuaded, which is just as bad). If you want to see how your communications’ credibility quotient measures up, review them with these key standards in mind:

Support for Claims
Just saying something doesn’t make it so. Do you claim that you’ll help clients reduce their energy consumption? You’d better say how, and provide real-world sample results. Do you declare an urgent need for your program? You should be detailing it. Do you tout a unique solution or approach? Show how it’s unique and why it’s better (and make sure you’re not misrepresenting your competitors or peers to make the case).

Even soft claims need support. You can say “we see our clients as partners” or “we understand your problems,” but unless you provide some evidence, those phrases are just meaningless clichés. Hyperbole counts too: it may seem harmless to say that people are “amazed” by your effectiveness, but unless they really are, this sounds like hucksterism. The general rule: any claim that’s not blindingly obvious (“the sun rises daily”) needs backup.

Response to Challenges
Every organization encounters problems now and then—leadership crises, organizational change, products that don’t work quite as they should, and so on. The temptation to paper them over—to minimize, ignore, divert atten­tion—can be strong.

But it’s a mistake. The people who are directly affected (and many who are not) know something’s up; failing to communicate frankly has all sorts of credibility-killing consequences. The rumor mill may start grinding, leading to speculation that paints the problem as worse than it is. People may lose trust in leaders who seem evasive or dishonest. As a result, the truth may also be greeted with suspicion.

Considering the possible outcomes, it’s best to take your lumps. Acknowledge issues promptly, recognize any distress people may have suffered, and—crucially—say what’s being done to address problems and overcome challenges. Few people expect others to be perfect; those who deal with dif­ficulties forthrightly earn respect—and usually a second chance.

Professional Presentation
Copy that’s clear, accurate, and error free isn’t just a nicety—it’s a measure of credibility. Sloppy writing indicates sloppy thinking and low standards to many, and factual errors undermine every statement you make. Fact checking and careful proofreading are steps that often get sacrificed, but you’re better off with a short delay to ensure quality. After all, your credibility is at stake. First published in the February 2008 issue of Words That Work.

What You Say, What They Hear

Most organizations have an internal language—a patois of professional jargon, insider concepts, and in-house categories. And it should stay internal. Alas, too many broadcast their group-speak to an uncomprehending public through websites and collateral materials that attempt to persuade but often baffle.

It reminds us of a famous Far Side cartoon in which a man is earnestly lecturing his dog, who hears only “Blah blah Ginger, blah blah blah….” When your org chart defines your website’s architecture, when you use terminology that’s not widely recognized outside your organization, when you describe your products or services from your perspective rather than your target market’s perspective, your audience is likely to hear only “blah, blah, blah.”

Internal language seeps into external communications so often because it’s difficult to catch yourself using it. Few of us can switch automatically from insider to outsider language—it takes conscious effort. But it’s worth it: People usually won’t tell you they don’t understand your terminology, they’ll just make assumptions. If they don’t find information in the expected place on your website, they’ll assume it’s not there. If a word has a common meaning that differs from a particular meaning within your organization, they’ll assume the common meaning.

So make sure your message doesn’t get lost in translation: speak your audience’s language.

First published in the February 2008 issue of Words That Work.

Calculating Your Impact

For those of us who love quizzes, environmental footprint calculators are as irresistible as they are sobering (not many of us get a “you rock” result). And in addition to point­ing out our Yeti-size impact on the planet’s resources, they illustrate some communications essentials.

American Public Media’s Consumer Consequences “game” may be the most elaborate calculator. It looks great, lets you create an avatar to move through your world, and covers your whole life, from energy use to food to shopping. But it fritters away its initial high engagement factor with a nonfunctional avatar (why offer it if it doesn’t do anything?) and clunky interface. The result (the number of planets it would take to support humankind if everyone lived like you) is clever and alarming, but the site doesn’t take advantage of that by asking you to do anything specific.

The Nature Conservancy’s calculator is nearly as comprehensive, but much faster and provides helpful advice on how to answer the questions accurately. The tips at the end are solid, but a little too general—what would really deliver is advice specific to users’ answers.

StopGlobalWarming.org takes an inspiring approach. Instead of calculating damage, it calculates the savings you can achieve in dollars and pounds of CO2 emitted by doing specific things. It’s not the prettiest calculator, but it got me out my chair and taking immediate action.

The lessons for communicators: don’t get fancy if you can’t fully deliver on expectations; ask people to do something specific—preferably right now; and show people what they can achieve, not just what they’re doing wrong. As for your own footprint, take the StopGlobalWarming.org actions, then calculate your impact. The result won’t hurt as much. First published October 2007 in Words That Work. 

Write for an Attention-Deficit Age

We could spend all day disproving the notion that nobody reads anymore, but it is true that in our multitasking, information-overload world, it’s harder to attract and hold a business audience than it once was. Here are a few tips to grab attention in an attention-deficit age:

Break the mold. Examine how similar organizations communicate, and do something different. Find an unusual angle. Be warmer or more analytical, more casual or more sophisticated—whatever everyone else is not. And ditch the jargon—buzzwords are a way to fit in, not to stand out.

Strike an emotional chord. Focus on what moves, excites, inspires, or alarms. What will get the strongest gut response? Not sure? Think about how you’d talk about it with an attractive stranger at a party.

Just say it. Bland, heavily qualified statements may head off controversy, but they also induce narcolepsy. Say what you mean, clearly and assertively, and support it. People will take notice. And if they take exception? That’s an opportunity for dialogue.

Be relevant. If your content isn’t of interest to your audience, you’ll lose them. Provide information readers want and you’ll keep them with you.

Use snappy display copy. If the most eye-catching copy on the page is dull, why would anyone read the small print? Strong display copy grabs readers; treating it as an afterthought is a mistake.

Underlying these strategies is a key principle: be compelling. And “compelling” means compelling to your audience, not necessarily to you or your organization. Cater to your readers’ interests and you’ll get their attention. First published in the March 2008 issue of Words That Work.