Write Better At Work

How to protect learners from the “curse of knowledge”

by

Philip Fernbach was well launched on his explanation of how to build a histogram by putting data into bins. Then a student apologized for asking a “stupid” question. “What’s a bin?” She wasn’t the only one who was confused. About half the students in the class didn’t understand the terminology Fernbach was using.

Actually the student’s question was very intelligent. She recognized a gap in her understanding. She also identified the information she needed to fill the gap. And she was brave enough to risk embarrassment by asking for the information she needed.

Fernbach was embarrassed, too, by his assumption that his students understood what he considered to be basic terminology. He used the opportunity to correct the gap in his students’ knowledge.

As Fernbach’s experience proves, knowing about the curse of knowledge is no guarantee we won’t fall victim to it. “When we know about something, we find it hard to imagine that someone else doesn’t know about it,” he and coauthor Steven Sloman write in The Knowledge Illusion.

How can we protect ourselves, and our learners, from the curse of knowledge?

We can

  • identify prerequisite knowledge and review it briefly (or provide online glossaries)
  • imagine we’re developing for a bright 9-year-old with no prior experience
  • pre-test fundamental terms and concepts
  • ask subject matter experts what “everybody already knows” about their field and assume many learners won’t know what SMEs take for granted
  • test materials with actual learners

None of these methods is perfect, which is why we’d be wise to do as Fernbach did and make it safe for learners to follow his advice: “If you find yourself with a stupid question, consider yourself lucky to have spotted a gap in understanding that others in the room might have missed, and have the courage to ask it. Your community will be wiser as a result.”

Fernbach, Philip. “We Should Be Asking More Stupid Questions.” 6 May 2017. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/we-should-asking-more-stupid-questions-philip-fernbach

Three Tech Tools for Writers

by

Forgotten passwords, mangled links, corrupted files, and spinning beachballs of death—misbehaving technology can drive the mildest-mannered writer to fury. Tempting as it may be to pound your computer into its component atoms, resist. Technology can also lighten the burden of a writer’s most onerous tasks.

Write or Die
Many writers find that motivation is their greatest challenge. Anyone who has expressed a desire to be a writer has received the standard counsel: ” The best advice I can offer if you want to be a writer is … write.  A lot.” That’s easy for Stan Nicholls to say. But how do you make yourself write when you don’t feel like it or  you can find dozens of more entertaining or more pressing things to do? Let Dr. Wicked motivate you.

Dr. Wicked, also known as Jeff Printy, understands how easy it is to put off writing because any negative effects of delay seem far in the future. His application makes sluggards feel the negative consequences of procrastination as soon as they stop typing. Users set a goal and choose their level of consequences. Gentle mode delivers a “mom-like reminder”; kamikaze mode eats your words as soon as you stop typing. Sounds harsh? You should have been warned by the name: Write or Die.

Readability Calculators
Write or Die is designed to spur writers to create drafts. A readability checker helps writers revise drafts to make them easier for readers to understand. If you use Microsoft Word, you can get a readability score each time you check spelling or grammar. Several checkers are available online. I prefer the calculator available at Online-Utility.org. It applies several formulas to calculate the difficulty of a writing sample. The Flesch-Kincaid score indicates how many months and years of education a person would need to read a sample easily. For example, understanding a passage with a Flesch-Kincaid score of 7.2 would require 7 years and 2 months of schooling. Many newspapers and popular novels are written at  about a seventh-grade reading level. Less commonly used, the Coleman-Liau index is a good choice for analyzing technical materials.

Although readability scores seem precise, they are based on algorithms that calculate sentence and word length. One formula scores E = MC^2 at a fifth-grade reading level, which ignores the complexity of Einstein’s theory of mass-energy equivalence. However, if your document scores higher than 10.0, readers will probably find it easier to understand if you shorten some sentences and prefer simple words to polysyllables. Online-Utility.org’s calculator suggests ways to make your writing simpler and more understandable.

Writer’sDiet Test
Another way to make your writing understandable is to avoid unnecessary words. However, once you’ve labored to create a draft, stripping out nonessentials can be painful. Experienced writers have developed strategies such as targeting sentences beginning with It is or tightening redundant phrases such as now at this present time. Beginners may have no clue about how they could tighten their writing. Writers at any level of experience can find out whether their writing is fit or flabby by taking the Writer’sDiet Test, developed by Helen Sword. Enter a sample of 100 to 1,000 words, run the test, and get writing results based on your “diagnosis.”

This entry scored “lean,” as shown below. After submitting a sample,  you can get editing suggestions by selecting How can the Writers’Diet Test help me improve my writing?

 

Notes

Stan Nicholls’ advice is found on his home page, stannicholls.com

Write or Die, available for several platforms, can be found at writeordie.com. Printy explains how he puts the “prod” in productivity in this video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdLLo08cJKY

To check readability in Microsoft Word, choose your version’s Help menu or visit http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/test-your-document-s-readability-HP010148506.aspx

Online-Utility.org’s readability calculator is available at http://www.online-utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp

The use and limits of using readability formulas are well explained in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Toolkit for Making Written Material Clear and Effective: https://www.cms.gov/Outreach-and-Education/Outreach/WrittenMaterialsToolkit/Downloads/ToolkitPart07.pdf

Take the Writer’sDiet Test at http://writersdiet.com/WT.php?home

Plain Language: Writing simply saves money and gets better results

by

Plain Language means no bull

Plain Talk is language your audience can understand the first time they read or hear it.

It’s the difference between “exercise your visual faculties prior to executing a jump” and “look before you leap.”

People often believe using pretentious language makes them seem intelligent. In reality, if you want to look smart, you should write simply, says Dr. Daniel Oppenheimer.

Plain English makes it easier for people to follow rules, fill out forms correctly, and understand medical advice.

Clear language also saves money. The Federal Communications Commission once needed five people to answer questions about its rules for citizen band radios. Putting the regulations into plain English freed all five staffers to take on other duties.

According to PlainLanguage.gov, “No one technique defines plain language. Rather, plain language is defined by results—it is easy to read, understand, and use.”

How can you make your writing easy for readers to understand? Use short sentences and simple words. Prefer active verbs to passive ones. Speak to the reader as “you.” Check out various guidelines to plain language to learn other techniques. Then test your writing with actual readers to be sure your message is clear.

It’s all about you: How two simple words can transform leaders and writers

by

We were gathered at 7:30 in the morning for a workshop on leadership. The presenter asked us to do an exercise that seemed so simple I began it only to humor her. Her challenge: take each letter of our first name and match it to a word describing ourselves as a leader.

Normally I would have matched C with Creative, but my brain was struggling to make connections at that hour of the morning. Fortunately a source of insight was sitting right beside me. Alan Feirer showed me his acrostic poem and said, “N stands for needs-meeter.”

With two words and a hyphen, he cheerfully flipped standard assumptions about leadership on their head. Many people think about leading from the leader’s perspective: it’s all about what I do, what I tell you to do, what I want you to think about my vision for where we’re going. In other words, I lead and your job is to get with the program.

In Feirer’s model, a leader asks, “What does our company need? As my direct report, what do you need from me?” That attitude positions the leader in the gap between what’s happening and what should be happening. From this perspective, leaders and followers are allies. A leader is more than a provider and assigner of resources; the leader becomes a resource. Responsibility for identifying needs is shared, so leaders’ thinking is no longer bounded by the four walls of a corner office.

How might this model apply to writing? To paraphrase Feirer, my job as a writer is to figure out what readers need and then meet those needs.

How can a business writer become a needs-meeter? The most effective approach, according to writing expert Kenneth W. Davis, is to switch hats. Wear your writer’s hat as you draft. Then take a break. When you return to your draft, take off your writer’s hat and put on your reader’s hat; in other words, reread your draft from your reader’s point of view.

  • Can you immediately find the reason you need to read this document?
  • Do you have all the information you need?
  • Is the information organized so that you can easily understand and act on it?

Answering those questions  from the reader’s point of view will help you make changes that will better serve your readers.

Switching hats might seem to create more work for writers up front. However, in the long run, reader-centered writing encourages your audience to pay attention to your message and reduces the need for follow-up.

For example, it’s easy to dash off an email headed Company picnic scheduled. That subject line leaves a lot of questions unanswered. Revising it to Reserve your tickets for Thriller Diller family outing by 7/1 takes just a few seconds and turns your message into a call to action.

Whether you’re leading or writing, switching perspectives can make it easier to treat your audience as allies. Just remember to ask: “What do you need?”

Notes: Alan Feirer posts his thoughts on leadership in his Group Dynamic blog.

Kenneth W. Davis is the author of The McGraw-Hill 36-Hour Course in Business Writing, available from Amazon.

Find advice about how to write with a you attitude in “Finding the Right Tone”: http://www.designsensory.com/pws/lesson12/index.html

Want to look smart? Write simply, says Ig Nobel winner Oppenheimer

by

Puffer Fish

The puffer fish is a slow swimmer in a sea of bigger, faster predators. When chased by a large hungry fish, a puffer rapidly inflates its stomach. This doubles its size and makes its spines stick out. Many pursuers are warned off by this display, but it is not the puffer’s only defense. Even predators with large teeth will have a hard time getting a grip on a tough-skinned, spiny sphere. Puffers are also among the most toxic species on Earth.

Inflation works for the puffer fish. Writers often assume it will work for them too. They think that using big words will make their ideas seem bigger. They also hope that stringing polysyllables together will make them look smarter.

The effect is likely to be just the opposite. A 2006 study by Daniel Oppenheimer found that the more writers inflated their language, the less likely they were to be seen as intelligent.

Judge for yourself. Here are two acceptance speeches. Which writer seems smarter?

Writer 1: “Formal studies conducted under controlled conditions have led to the inescapable conclusion that composers of written materials who avoid proliferation of words, needless digressions, and polysyllabic words are perceived to be more intelligent than writers who indulge in prolixity and eschew concision. So I wish to express my gratitude for your recognition of my research endeavors.”

Writer 2: “My research shows that conciseness is interpreted as intelligence. So thank you.”

The second example is Daniel Oppenheimer’s acceptance speech for the 2006 Ig Nobel Prize for Literature. The Ig Nobels, awarded by Annals of Improbable Research, recognize research that first makes people laugh and then makes them think.

Oppenheimer hopes his results will help writers avoid inflated language . “I think it’s important to point out that this study is not about problems with using long words, it’s about problems with using long words needlessly. If the best way to say something involves using a complex word, then by all means do so. But if there are several equally valid ways of expressing your ideas, you should go with the simpler one.”

Do you tend to use inflated language? Two online tools can help you simplify your language. Take the Writer’s Diet Test at http://writersdiet.com/WT.php or get suggestions for shortening your sentences from this online readability checker: www.online-utility.org/english/readability_test_and_improve.jsp

Notes:

Picture of puffer fish is a public domain image from http://a-z-animals.com/animals/puffer-fish/pictures/2909/

Oppenheimer’s acceptance speech was quoted in “The Ig Nobel Winners’ Circle,” Nature, October 12, 2006, p. 617. His Ig Nobel-winning paper,”Consequences of Erudite Vernacular Utilized Irrespective of Necessity: Problems with Using Long Words Needlessly,” was published in Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(2): 139–156.

Oppenheimer’s comment on his results is from Jody Bruner’s July 25, 2009, post, “How to Impress Your Boss”: http://brunerbiz.com/tag/daniel-oppenheimer/

The official Ig Nobel site is http://www.improbable.com/ig/