boss wants to dumb down my writing, telling a job-hunting relative he stinks, and more

by Alison Green on November 19, 2024

It’s five answers to five questions. Here we go…

1. My manager wants to dumb down my writing

After a long stint in academia, I took a position with a state workforce agency two years ago. While I still teach adjunct at the university and maintain a “collegiate vocabulary,” I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices. My main role in government focuses on writing grant applications, contracts, policy, and codified law.

However, a chief complaint of my direct manager (it’s even on my formal “improvement plan”) is to use plain English, as large words intimidate and confuse her. Recently, when tasked to write a brief for our governor (!!!) she said she wanted to run it through Chat GPT or AI to “dumb it down for them.” This is only one of many times she’s noted needing to run my writing through an AI tool to “reword it” for clarity. I pride myself on clear writing, have ghostwritten for published authors, and pride myself on my written communication skills. Am I off-base to be offended? Is academia-level written communication out of touch? Is use of an AI tool at the state government level an insult to me and my understanding of “voice” and interpretation of “audience”? Or is this the new standard and I need to make my peace with it?

Yes, academic writing is often out-of-sync with writing for other professional contexts.

I can’t speak to your writing specifically, but I can tell you that a lot of people from academia write in a much denser way than is suitable for other contexts, and it can be a real slog to read them, let alone edit them. When your manager talks about “dumbing things down,” she doesn’t necessarily mean that she thinks you should speak to your audience as if they are dumb; it’s shorthand for, “Write in plainer, simpler language because it’s faster and more pleasant for most people to read” and also, “You are not writing in our organization’s voice, and you need to.” That’s very reasonable feedback, and if that’s what she means it wouldn’t be about large words intimidating or confusing her; it would be her telling you that your writing doesn’t meet the standards needed to do your job successfully.

There’s no point in being insulted by that; different jobs require different writing approaches, and academic writing won’t be right for most contexts outside of academia. Especially if you’re on a formal improvement plan that mentions this, you should take that feedback very seriously.

2. Am I obligated to tell my job-hunting relative that he stinks?

I think I know the answer here, but it is a sensitive situation. My spouse and I spend a lot of time with their brother, and we both have noticed that he has really strong body odor.

So far, we have opted to ignore this fact. He’s going through a rough transition personally, and is a very considerate person, and I think would be bothered to hear about his smell. At the same time, we both wonder, how can he NOT know?

He is currently job-hunting, and I worry that when he gets to the in-person interview stage, the fact that he stinks will certainly hurt his chances of getting the job. Should one of us say something? And if so, how would you suggest broaching the subject?

Please say something. It’s very likely to hurt his chances and while it may be momentarily embarrassing to hear that he smells, he’s far better off hearing it from someone who loves him and wants to help than to remain oblivious. (This assumes you think he is oblivious, of course, and it’s not a medical thing he can’t help.)

It should probably come from your spouse since they’re the relative — although if you’re closer to the brother than your spouse is, that could mean you’re a better choice; it just really depends on the dynamics of each relationship. So does what to say — in some sibling relationships, a casual “bro, you smell — you need to hit the shower or do some laundry or something” would be completely fine and even easier to hear than a more delicate approach. Other people would be mortified by that and would prefer something more tactful and framed as, “I feel awkward mentioning this but I’d want you to tell me.” Because these are personal relationships and not work ones, it’s so, so relationship-dependent. (If it were my sister, I’d just be like “hey, you smell weird” — bluntness is a family value for us — but if I were worried it was tied to depression or similar, I’d frame it more sensitively.)

One tip though —sometimes odor really is a laundry issue (they’re not washing their clothes enough or they’re not fully drying them so they’re getting mildewed) and that can be a less embarrassing framework to use, whether or not it’s the actual explanation for what’s happening.

Related:
how to talk to an employee about body odor (and the update)
my coworker told me I smell

3. Accommodations for defiance at work

Years ago, I taught a student who had a 504 plan for Oppositional Defiance Disorder. This was the only time I’ve seen that diagnosis for a student at the public high school I teach at. The vast majority of the time, 504 plans are for students with ADHD or an anxiety disorder and include the directives for their accommodations, like extended time taking a test.

This student, “Mary,” had the accommodation to take a pause and regroup before choosing whether or not she wanted to complete the task given. In practice, this meant that Mary ignored me anytime I gave the class instructions. She refused to take part in group activities and projects. She spent 90% of class with headphones on, watching YouTube videos of cooking shows on her laptop. I was frustrated for most of the year with Mary until finally leaving her alone and not even trying to engage. In the end, Mary scored a 4 on the AP exam in my class.

I don’t know if Mary went on to college, but she’s at the age now where she would be likely graduating. My question is, how in the world can someone with ODD have any sort of reasonable accommodation in the workplace? I am so curious how anyone with certain types of behavior disorders can function in a workplace. Do they just have to work for themselves? I cannot imagine a boss allowing their employee to ignore them and decide not to do work without getting fired.

To be clear, I fully support the right/importance for accommodations for those with the need for it. I just think of Mary every once in a while and am truly wondering how one exists within our societal workplace norms with a disorder that means you have a pattern of uncooperative, defiant, and hostile behavior.

The types of accommodations that are reasonable in school aren’t always the same as the accommodations that are reasonable at work. At school, accommodations are geared toward allowing students to participate and learn. At work, accommodations are about helping them perform the essential functions of the position, and if they can’t do that even with accommodations employers aren’t required to hire or keep them on.

Ignoring instructions, refusing to take part in projects, and watching YouTube 90% of the day wouldn’t be considered reasonable accommodations for a job. So yes, people who struggle with oppositional defiance often do have trouble holding down jobs.

For what it’s worth, though, ODD is a controversial diagnosis and is often criticized as pathologizing normal child/adolescent behavior and/or trauma responses. You see it a lot in foster care, where kids’ response to traumatic circumstances is pathologized and they get slapped with that (extremely stigmatizing) label.

4. How to contact someone’s boss in an emergency

I was recently in a work meeting where I found out that a few years ago, one of my coworkers went into a coma for a month!

It got me thinking … I know in past letters, you’ve made it very clear that the only time a parent, spouse, etc. should contact someone’s boss on their behalf is in emergency situations where the employee would not be able to do so on their own. But how would that even work? It’s not as though I have my husband’s manager’s contact information (or even know their full name) and have no idea how I would get in touch with them to let them know if there was a medical emergency. In my coworker’s case, how on earth did my company learn what had happened?!

Sharing my manager’s contact info with my husband “just in case” feels like overkill. But on the other hand, there is no other way for him to know how to contact my manager. Am I overthinking this?

I don’t know why this question has stuck in my brain, but I’m curious to know how these things actually play out and what you’d recommend.

It’s not overkill to give your manager’s contact info to your spouse! It could save time and hassle if you’re ever in a situation where you need him to contact your employer.

In cases where people haven’t done that and the spouse can’t get the info from the incapacitated partner, usually they’re stuck calling the company’s main number and trying to track down the right person to talk to. At big companies that can be a major undertaking, and it’s much easier if they just have direct contact info.

5. Should I tell job candidates I’m going on maternity leave right after they start?

I manage a team at a small (100-person) company in the U.S. We’re lucky to have a generous parental leave policy (four months) and family friendly environment: lots of parents work at the company, including my own boss and two of my six teammates. I’m actively looking to hire for my team, and I have a couple great people in the pipeline. I’m also six months pregnant, and will be going on leave in about three months.

When giving a candidate an offer, should I let them know that the manager of the team they’re joining will be taking parental leave soon? Selfishly, I want them to join regardless, and I’ll be back! But from their side, would it be frustrating or feel like a bait-and-switch to learn about your manager being gone for a few months so soon after you start? We have a coverage plan in place, so they’ll have another manager during my leave, and I don’t think it’s legally required, but what’s your general advice for doing right by candidates?

Yes, let them know. Very few people will turn down an offer over that, but a lot of people would feel blindsided if they didn’t learn about it until after they started. You don’t have to let them know ahead of time, but most people will appreciate it as a courtesy.

Ideally you’d also let them know how it will affect them — who’d they be reporting to and what the plan will be for supporting them while you’re away.

You may also like:
{ 796 comments }

{ 796 comments… read them below }

  2. Ginger Cat Lady*

    OP1, they are not “dumbing down” your writing, they making it appropriate for the audience. Your writing is not a place for you to show off vocabulary and writing skill (even if you pride yourself for it!), it’s for *communication* and you absolutely should not be offended to be told that what you are doing is not a good fit for the audience.
    Don’t let your pride over your vocabulary and writing be an obstacle to communication and employment.

    1. Testing*

      Exactly. And politicians have to slog through A LOT of material and quickly learn the main points of it. So it makes sense that the governor needs something clear and accessible, not something that shows off someone’s finest writing. It’s not about the governor being “dumb”, it’s about efficiency and clarity.

      1. Roland*

        Yeah. “I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices” is… A Lot. I am not intimidated by it, I just think that for an advice blog, “I communicate clearly” would do the job much better.

        1. Richard Hershberger*

          Yup. I went into the letter expecting something akin to the incident from the 90s, when a VP fired an employee for using “pedagogy” in a corporate document, because the VP only knew one word beginning with “ped-” and they would have none of that! Hilarity ensued, with the employee reinstated and the VP decreeing that communications should only use common words, by which presumably he meant words that he knew. The only proper response to this is to issue executive summaries in Dick and Jane language.

          But yeah, “I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices” is classic “Why use three words when fourteen will do?”

          The way to approach this is as a matter of genre. Different genres have different stylistic conventions. A proficient writer adapts to the genre.

          1. Falling Diphthong*

            And just as a good actor can read the same lines and seem menacing, cheerful, or bored; and a good fiction writer can rework the same scene from different points of view–a good nonfiction writer can navigate from “simple quick explanation” to “no hand-holding in this briefing for experts.”

            When oldest was finishing her undergraduate degree, the department explicitly required you to come up with three different elevator pitches, at different levels. She summarized her approach to the exercise as “Here’s the title of my thesis; how many of the words did you understand?”

            1. Alexander Graham Yell*

              Exactly. LW 1’s work needs to be able to be read at an “I have 5 minutes to prepare for this meeting, what do I need to know and what is the most important thing to focus on?” level. Sure, maybe the 5 syllable words are a hair more precise than the simpler ones, but if it can’t be read and understood quickly, it’s not useful.

              1. JSPA*

                these are also the bullet points they will use to communicate with the public, and with councilmembers who have their own public. If you can’t be thorough and direct and correct in common words of one and two syllables, and sentences without conditional clauses, subordinate clauses and double negatives, take a class, or expect to have to find another job.

              2. Helen Waite*

                So true!

                The letter writer has mentioned ghostwriting for published authors – plural – and thus has the ability to write in other voices.

                1. MigraineMonth*

                  I am curious about the audiences for those books. There’s a huge difference between writing for “published authors” that include children’s book, popular science and academic authors, and writing for just academic authors.

            2. Nightengale*

              Your comment about elevator pitches reminds me of my years on the science fair circuit in high school.

              I used to have multiple explanations ranging from the one I would give a judge who had a PhD in my field to that I would give a scientist in a different field to that I would give a history teacher/librarian to that I would give a little brother or sister.

              A lot of it came down to using the same concepts but using more or less specialized vocabulary or whether I needed to define the vocabulary. I learned that if I could explain it to our librarian/history teacher who claimed to be afraid of science, I could explain it to anybody.

              Then I became a science teacher
              Then I became a pediatrician

                1. Nightengale*

                  If you placed at the school fair you could go onto the regional fair
                  If you placed at the regional fair you could go onto states

                  I got to regional and states 3 times? 4 times?

                  I never really cared about winning but I did like science fairs so I liked being able to go on to the next one.

                  Mind you the top winner at the regional fair got to the international fair which was never me but was people from my 150 student little school several times.

              2. Laura*

                My spouse and I are both scientists and often end up explaining concepts to our kids. Being able to explain something at a level a kindergartener can understand means we can explain it to anyone, and it is great practice to identify the most important parts of a concept.

                1. Escapee from Corporate Management*

                  And it’s a great skill to have. So few can do this well. OP1, take note.

                2. Glitsy Gus*

                  I write User Manuals and other public facing documentation for medical devices. The first thing I say to the Medical and Science folks when we start talking is, “OK, explain this to me the same way you describe it to your grandma at Christmas dinner.” It isn’t about making it dumb, it’s about making it simple and getting to the point for people who don’t have the same context and insight.

                  OP, start checking the reading level of your documents. Anything public facing should be around the 8th grade level or lower. It isn’t about being dumb, it’s about being accessible and easy to digest.

            3. I Have RBF*

              Also in scientific writing is the abstract – a high level summary of the paper( or study): What the thesis being examined was, a brief description of the methodology, and the overall conclusion. Essentially, it’s the executive summary of the scientific world.

              At one job, the first project I had to do was pull the abstracts from a bunch of environmental chemistry papers and put them in a searchable database. (This was in the early 90s). All of the papers were hard copy, and around half of them didn’t have abstracts! So I got to read the papers and write the abstracts. My managers were unsure on whether I could do this – after all, I didn’t have a degree. But they let me try a couple. They were fine – because I can read a dense paper, pull out the salient bits, and generate and abstract.

              Writing to the audience is essential. I was writing abstracts for a semi-technical audience who wanted to be able to skim the abstracts to see if they should read the whole paper. I would not have been able to write them in “up-goer five”, however. (See https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/the-up-goer-five-thing-where-learned-people-explain-hard-stuff-with-easy-words-2662302/)

              Yes, for some people, your writing needs to be almost as basic as up-goer five. A large number of national level politicians I believe fall in that group.

              1. NotBatman*

                I’d never heard of up-goer five before, but it is amazing. Just spent 20 minutes making a description of my dissertation that only uses those 1000 words.

          2. Wayward Sun*

            I call that “Chomsky syndrome,” after Noam Chomsky’s impenetrable writing in his books. He’s incredibly intelligent but has no clue how to write for a lay audience.

            1. Six for the truth over solace in lies*

              My linguistics prof in college had a sheet with bonus reading if some part of the 101 class struck your fancy: a list of further reading for phonology, another for semantics, and so on. Kind of a “if you enjoyed taking this class for your general education credit, consider learning more!” thing.

              Chomsky was under “not for the faint of heart.”

        3. Insulindian Phasmid*

          Actually thanks for this – I’m a writer/editor and that phrase didn’t immediately flag for me as overly complicated. This is just the way some of us talk and write and that’s fine. But pointing it out definitely shows me that Alison is right. It IS wordier than it needs to be. Now I’m hyper analyzing my own comment because I know I write different!

          1. Mockingjay*

            It’s the adage: write to your audience. And its corollary: write to the audience’s audience. Because stuff gets passed on. Your paper is used to brief the governor, who then briefs his staff, who then passes on the info at the press conference, which is conveyed in sound bites to constituents.

            The job is to write what is needed, not what you are capable of.

          2. Bitte Meddler*

            I have come to dread sending any comments in my friends’ group WhatsApp chat group. I am incapable of writing two pithy sentences that encapsulate the thing I am trying to tell them about.

            In writing for work, I write it how I want it, then I go through and create 1-2 short sentence bullet points for each paragraph.

            Then I go through *those* and give each bullet point a 1-5 word title / category. That’s my final piece that goes to management.

            I was genuinely dismayed when I got to my current company and realized that an “audit report” to them is a 4-5 slide PowerPoint presentation with only high-level bullet points. I’m like, “But look at this beautiful 9-page report I created in Word!”

      2. Jaydee*

        I’m also a state government employee who struggles with this (being a lawyer with the ADHD tendency to provide every bit of context that might be helpful makes it hard to create a true “one-pager”). While language choices and sentence structure matter, it’s as much about formatting and shortening as it is about “dumbing it down.”

        The Governor isn’t going to read a 3 page dense wall of text in full paragraphs with citations. I don’t care how smart your Governor is or how capable they are of reading it, they don’t have time. Or maybe they have time to read it once, but what they need is a document that can be a quick reference. When their staffer gets asked “what’s the status of the llama groomer workforce initiative?” they can pull up that document, give it a quick skim, and sound reasonably well-informed.

        You want short paragraphs with descriptive bold headings, bullet points, maybe a graphic of some sort. Think brochure or flyer versus essay.

        If possible, see if your boss or co-workers can share some examples with you of similar documents that others have created so you can get a feel for the writing style. And if they use a consistent template/format be sure to use that so the reader can easily jump to the right section for the information they need.

        1. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

          Also a lawyer and I manage other lawyers. I find that executive summary style writing is very difficult for lawyer-people, I think because details so often matter in the actual legal analysis.

          1. MassMatt*

            IME my field (finance) suffers badly from having not just lawyers, but lawyers specializing in finance, write or at least review everything to the degree that they might as well have written it.

            A fairly straightforward notice that someone has reached retirement age and can start taking money out if they want, but must start taking required minimum distributions at a certain age becomes an impenetrable letter including the phrase “your account will be assigned deferred status until age 73”.

            Written materials need to take their audience into account. Materials intended for the general public need to be written very differently from academic papers, or material for the governor. It’s about knowing your audience, not seeking to embiggen everyone’s vocabulary.

            1. A perfectly normal-size space bird*

              Can confirm, re: finance. We inherited an IRA from my in-laws and it’s causing issues (among other things like why BIL got $2 million and we got $20k) trying to figure out what to do with this thing. I am so thoroughly sick of trying to read articles on how to manage the RMDs, bonds, and tax rules. Everything from trusted sources are written for people who are already familiar with aspects of investment finance that I only have ever scratched the surface of. They all use terminology that when I look up those words, lead to explanations that use other specialized terminology that also require looking up until I have two dozen browser tabs open and have lost the thread. I finally gave up and hired a CPA to explain it to me.

              1. Anonymous For Now*

                “We inherited an IRA from my in-laws and it’s causing issues (among other things like why BIL got $2 million and we got $20k)…”

                Why, indeed!

                When our surviving parent passed away, we took everything out, paid the taxes, and distributed the money.

          2. Jaydee*

            I can totally see that. Thinking all the way back to law school (it’s been a while) and we were taught IRAC – issue, rule, application, conclusion. It’s basically the opposite of how to write an executive summary.
            – Executive summary writing is supposed to be short. IRAC is going to have a minimum of four “paragraphs” (some might be shorter than others, but you’re not going to keep it to four sentences or bullet points).
            – Executive summary should lead with the conclusion. Put your most important takeaways up front. In IRAC the conclusion is at the end and makes you read through the analysis to get there. Some people use CRAC instead and have the conclusion at the start and end, but that doesn’t always make sense in a memo or brief.
            – Executive summaries are usually pretty high level overviews, while like you said, the details often matter in legal analysis. You often need to get pretty deep in the weeds setting out specific facts and making detailed comparisons to other cases.

            1. Festively Dressed Earl*

              One of the most useful things I learned my 1L year was how to write a 4-sentence IRAC. It wasn’t even part of a class; one of the veteran professors saw a need and started a weekly workshop on the technique.

        2. J. random person*

          I used to write emails that went to everyone at a university. I initially would try to cover everything and answer every possible question I could think of. Eventually I realized that no matter how clearly or how well I wrote it, nobody was reading all that stuff! Give them the 3 or 5 bullet points with the main info, and let them ask questions if they have them. Half of them will ask even if you answered it already, including PhDs. So just keep it as short and as simple as it can be.

          Are there times when it can’t be short and sweet? Sure, and maybe your boss is wrong and this is one of those times – or maybe they know your audience.

          1. not nice, don't care*

            I send a regular reminder/newsletter to my faculty ‘clients’ and have learned to assume no one reads the text, no matter how concise. They just use the email as a placeholder for replies asking me about the very info included in the email.
            Always gobsmacked at the lack of comprehension/responsibility in people tasked with shaping young minds.

            1. MigraineMonth*

              When I get really discouraged about other people’s carelessness with things that matter to me, I try to remember that certain things are my priorities because they’re my job. People with other jobs have different priorities.

              If I want busy professionals to give me feedback about my latest UI design, I need to make it really easy for them to do and I have to make doing so advance their priorities. That’s why every time I ask them for feedback, I try to make sure it makes at least one part of their workflow much faster or easier, so they will also care about it.

          2. Wayward Sun*

            A related thing is, when trying to get information from someone, i try to not to ask more than one or two questions in an email. I found any questions after that get ignored anyway.

        3. Katara's side braids*

          Also an ADHDer who struggles with wanting to cram in every possible piece of information that people might want/need clarified. I work in a niche area of my field that deals with lots of exceptions to standard laws/policies/processes. I often need to email someone requesting X, when most “normal” agencies would be able to do Y or Z, both of which are more convenient for the other person than X. I feel like my choices are “long , bulleted email pre-empting every argument in favor of Y and Z so we can skip to the part where they do X,” “normal, readable email that starts a completely predictable back-and-forth where I have to explain everything I would in the long email, but in a way that’s more disruptive to my workflow,” or “phone call where they assume I must not understand Y or Z and launch into an explanation, which I either need to interrupt or sit through before I can explain why they’re wrong.”

          I’m really bad at interrupting, but I also struggle with impatience (again, ADHD) – to me, sitting through a verbal explanation that I know is irrelevant, and that I have to take in at the pace that the other person talks, is 1000x worse than any flowery, long-winded email. At least I can read an email at my own pace.

          I’ve tried short paragraphs, shorter bullets, and asking ChatGPT for help, but ultimately I haven’t found a way to bypass the back-and-forth that doesn’t result in a very long email. It’s painful.

          1. Mad Harry Crewe*

            You need to plan for the back and forth. The people you’re working with are not a single unit. Each one of them is new to this experience, and is (reasonably!) going to have questions and concerns – especially since you’re requesting something that *you acknowledge* is inconvenient and not the obvious solution. They aren’t weird for wanting an easier or more familiar solution (Y or Z) or for worrying that you’re not putting their interests first.

            You are trying to skip the step where you build a trust relationship with your clients, and that step is unskippable. Part of what you’re demonstrating during the back and forth is your expertise and trustworthiness – that you listen, that you see them as real people, that you have reasons for asking what you’re asking for. A great deal of dealing with modern bureaucracy is recognizing when you’re getting the runaround and extracting yourself from it. Your clients are not being unreasonable to watch out for their own interests.

            However, you can make this easier on yourself. You do get to lean on your expertise, but do it by acknowledging and reassuring. Customer: “but why can’t we Y or Z? OtherAgency did Y and I don’t understand why you can’t.” You: “Good question! Here’s what’s going on: Y and Z are great for [other situation], but [brief explanation of what’s missing]. We have a requirement for [the thing you need] and X is the only process that includes that. We’ve found that people who submit Y always need to go through the full X process, which adds a lot of delay and inconvenience. I want to make sure you get what you need as quickly as possible. Yes, X is more work up front, but it will save you time and hassle in the long run.”

            Start paying attention to the language that resolves the conversation faster, use it consistently, and refine it over time. You shouldn’t be working off of a script, but you can probably find responses that hit the right mix of enough detail that it’s clear you do actually know what you’re doing, but clear enough that you’re not overwhelming the client.

            Consider writing an FAQ document and attaching it to the short, readable email – some people may find the FAQ helpful and it will likely pre-empt some of the questions. But also, recognize that it will help by a few percentage points – not by taking away all of the questions.

            If you get the same question from the same person multiple times, it’s time to go to a phone call. Some people don’t grasp written communication as well or as fast as spoken. Some people don’t feel heard in text, but you can make them feel supported and heard on a call.

        4. HQetc*

          As a recovering academic with ADHD now in a policy org, I feel this! It is hard to shift writing styles, and depending on your background it can mean “undoing” a lot of training, because I have definitely encountered a lot of academics who were taught that academic writing is superior and more correct and precise. While there is of course some truth to that on the precision front, the equation of “more precise” with “better” breaks down in a lot of contexts.

          One of the things I was taught by my advisor (who was great and, frankly, unusual amongst academics in that he was really good about understanding different audience needs) is that “all abstractions are wrong, but some abstractions are useful.” What he meant by that was that all communication requires abstraction (even a robust, detailed journal article will probably contain *some* level of abstraction because the nature of academia is such that you are the singular expert in your work). The point is to find an abstraction that is useful and not too wrong. If you go too hard on the “not too wrong” side of the scale, you’re not being useful, so what’s the point? I try to bear this in mind in all my work now, because I want to have impact and convince people to come around to my way of thinking on issues, and I can’t do that if my work is not useful to them.

          On a brass-tack front, templates are a god send for this, as are page limits. But accepting feedback from my boss, comms folks, and others with a different vantage point that is closer to our audience than mine is really the most critical aspect of this! I am a subject matter expert, and so is out comms team! Game recognize game!

          (Of course, this comment is way too long and wordy, because good, concise, accessible writing is hard, and I am on break from such writing, and don’t have the time to streamline here. And that’s ok for this blog comment, but probably not for a letter to the governor, ya know?)

          1. duinath*

            Yeah, it is important to be able to switch, it is important to know *how* to switch, and it is something you can practice and improve.

            I think the “dumbing down” language LW1 is hearing is very bad framing. Intelligence has very little, if anything, to do with it.

            I prefer to think of it like a dress code. If you’re showing up to a work event in white tie, all the business formals around you may feel a bit put off, for example. It’s a beautiful outfit, but it simply does not fit the occasion.

            Consider your audience, consider the setting, watch what the people around you are doing, and adjust accordingly.

          2. bookmark*

            re: academic teaching and incompatibility with “real world” writing, in grad school I TAed a course for undergrads about science and public policy/politics, but was actually “teaching people who mostly write scientific articles how to write for the rest of us.” My job was to grade their writing and include detailed comments on, for example, what passive voice is and why they should avoid it in most contexts. It was helpful that it was a class about politics, so we had lots of examples at hand of squirrely politicians using passive voice to avoid taking responsibility for stuff. It was hard for a lot of them, since they’d spent years being taught a completely different style of writing in all their science classes. Hopefully their misery at the time paid off for them when they got out of school…

      3. megaboo*

        I am currently getting my master’s in public administration and we write memos to imaginary politicians. We have to keep our memos to two pages for clarity. It can be difficult to edit tons of information to two pages. It’s not really :”dumbing down”, it’s getting to the point with clarity.

      4. Miette*

        In the spirit of offering advice to OP1, I recommend reading up on past “acceptable” writing from your department so you can internalize voice, tone, and terminology before writing something new.

        I am a marketer who works with a variety of clients in fields as diverse as high tech and non profits, and depending on factors from a client’s market to the product/service they offer, the type of communication, or the piece, the language can differ greatly, even for the same client. Unless the job is to overhaul these things, each time I start a new project or work with a new client, I familiarize myself with past output so I create new content that is in line with it. It makes the editing process go easier.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Good idea! Keeping terminology consistent is such a large part of communicating clearly, particularly when communicating about a jargon-heavy field (aren’t they all?) to people outside that field.

      5. Rat Racer*

        I feel for you OP1. I often receive that same criticism, and it stings because it feels like an accusation of pretentiousness. My boss and colleagues poked fun at me once for using the word “empiricism” in a powerpoint. (Then my spouse and I got into a fight about it because he claims that although the word “empirical” is common English, “empiricism” – the noun – is pretentious. And I think that is total hogwash! Someone please back me up on this…)

        1. TableItandCircleBack*

          Sorry, I’m with your spouse! “Empirical” is fairly common English for “this is based on actual evidence.” “Empiricism” is a philosophical theory that I had to google to double check I remembered accurately.

          1. rebelwithmouseyhair*

            As a translator from flowering, intellectual French into plain English, I’ll back you up. “Empiricism” totally sounds like a word I’d be grappling with. Ok it exists but I have never seen it used in English, while the French would be throwing it around in gay abandon. I’d be rewriting the entire sentence so I could use “empirical” instead, because that does look familiar.

        2. Fluffy Fish*

          well….I think things come off as pretentious to others when a simpler word will do for the audience. not sure what you do for work, but I don’t even think I’d use the word empirical unless I was talking a very specific audience.

        3. xylocopa*

          I don’t know about pretentious, but “empiricism” has a much narrower niche of usage than “empirical.” The term isn’t pretentious if you’re talking about philosophy of knowledge, but outside of that subject area it’s rarely used and probably isn’t the best word to choose.

        4. not nice, don't care*

          My partner used to do tech support for a small rural ISP back in the day, and used the word ‘redundant’ to a customer. Customer replied “That’s a mighty big word for Stevens County”, which is now a part of our familect whenever multisyllabic words enter the chat.

        5. MigraineMonth*

          I have a large vocabulary and regularly use (and often mispronounce) words that other people don’t know. I’m not trying to be pretentious, it’s just a word I know and the word my brain picked for some reason.

          I am also annoyed when other people use words I don’t know and find it pretentious. (I’d say something about hubris, but I’m not sure if most people know what that means. Harmartia is probably closer to what I mean, but I can never remember it so by definition is must be pretentious.)

        6. Mary*

          I’m sorry. I have minors in both English and writing, and I still had to look up the definition of “empiricism” to make sure I remembered it. :(

        7. Festively Dressed Earl*

          It depends on what you were trying to communicate in the Powerpoint. “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug,” and sometimes it feels like you’re choosing between precision and clarity. I can relate to feeling isolated when someone mocks you for using a long word when you’re truly not attempting to show off – all of a sudden you’re back in third grade being teased for preferring reading to kickball during recess. Btw, your spouse is wrong; ’empirical’ isn’t common English either. What’s common English depends on your audience, which is why a lot of AAM commenters know the definition but the average person probably wouldn’t.

        8. Starbuck*

          Was the powerpoint about philosophy, for philosophers? Otherwise it’s hard to imagine the context that word would be necessary!

      6. SaraMan34*

        Came here to say this. The fact that they seem offended by this request for the governor really indicates that they don’t understand politicians. Listen to your boss.

    2. A perfectly normal-size space bird*

      Agreed! I know it can be hard to switch voices when one has been dominant but you really need to keep audience in mind (and why is it “audience” with quotation marks?). As Ginger Cat Ladh said, the point is communication and you need to be able to communicate information quickly. Your audience may even have a wide variety of reading ability. Not that some are lesser abilities than others, it’s more that different people read differently.

      I learned this the hard way when I started my current position. I had to write training documents about middle and high school science. I was used to writing academic papers and articles and thought since the audience were people who all had college degrees, some advanced, surely they would be able to handle academic language. But in the end, I had to redo months of work because the point was to train employees in a way that was clear to everyone and communicated the information as plainly as possible to avoid misinterpretation and conflicting evaluation.

      1. Ask a Manager* Post author

        To add to that, I’d argue that even when you know your audience has a high level of reading ability, non-academic language is still usually stronger writing.

        1. Certaintroublemaker*

          Very true! Studies have shown that the more complex writing is, the more it appears to be (or actually is) trying to hide something. For example, the Enron annual reports became more and more densely written in ways that were harder to parse as the company started engaging in shenanigans.

          1. Lemons*

            Some mega-corporations I’ve worked with in the past had literal BINDERS of in-house work language (not technical terms). They would earnestly say things like, “we want to synergize the deliverables by aligning and laddering-up the messaging, to make it easier to download,” meaning, “we want customers to understand what we’re selling them.”

            For a few notable examples, I had to print it out and black out meaningless phrases or sentences to suss out the request, because the language was so byzantine. Coworkers were similarly baffled by those ones.

          2. MassMatt*

            Enron’s management team leaned into this, claiming that anyone questioning their accounting or business plan just couldn’t POSSIBLY understand the complexity of their business.

            Quite a few very knowledgeable people were blowing the whistle on them but too many people let their greed get the best of their common sense.

        2. Agent Diane*

          Research shows that highly literate people prefer plain English, as it means they can read and understand it quickly. Plain English also makes your work more accessible for people with disabilities. For example, it is easier to follow when being read aloud by a screen reader. When you work in government communications, clarity always comes first. This is why you are getting this feedback.

          OP1 ~ I’d encourage you to think why this is sticking in your craw. I’ve 20+ years in government writing. In my experience, people who are unwilling to change to plain English either:
          1. Struggle to believe the average reading comprehension is as low as it is
          2. Find plain English a slog to write
          3. Have tied their sense of identify to their complex use of language, seeing it as a signifier of their great intelligence.

          Plain English does take longer, hence the old saw about not having time to make a letter shorter. But your job is to write clearly, and you’re getting repeated feedback that you are not doing that. I’ll drop a link to the UK government writing guidelines after this comment, but I’d also like to quote from a handbook on writing for government.

          “Some writers seem to think if they can drag in plenty of long or unfamiliar or technical or modish words, arranged in long and involved sentences, their readers will regard them as clever fellows and be stunned into acquiescence. Not so: most readers will be more likely to think ‘This man is a pompous ass. I’m not going to agree with him if I can help it.'” (Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, 1954)

          2. EllenD*

            This is my experience as a UK civil servant, it was important to write clearly on complex issues, having identified the key factors that those reading, making decisions need to know to make the best decision. I’ve worked with Ministers who had dyslexia, so using plain simple language was especially important with easy to read layout (eg using bullet points). You have to really understand a subject to be able to distil it down to simple language and present in a clear logical manner. As a policy civil servant my role means acting as a filter between the technical experts and those who aren’t but make decisions to ensure both sides understood what the other needed and the issues and potential consequences.

            1. Daisy*

              Yep. I’m in a similar role and have gained enough credibility that some of the scientists are starting to listen to me. My most scandalous proposition to date: nobody wants to hear about your methodology. They just want to hear your conclusions (preferably in 3-5 bullet points).

              People forget that politicians are getting opinions from all sides and if civil servants can’t give clear, actionable advice, the Minister will go with whatever is in the fancy slide deck presented by lobbyists (or worse, the latest opinion column from the local newspaper).

              1. Abraham Wald*

                One of the things that I learned early on was how to pick out and summarize the scientific result that really impacts a decision. A new guy asked me to look over his first presentation showing his method and results, and it was maybe ten well-written slides with 5-10 bullet points each that all made good sense. Yet on slide 2 I saw a bullet point near the bottom of the page, and I told him to cut that out, paste it onto a new first page, and title the slide BLUF (bottom line up front). He had buried the most important bit! After the presentation he told me that the senior managers looked at that first line, immediately started talking to each other for 25 minutes, and then they let him run through the rest of his presentation in the last few minutes. I know some people might find it rude that they essentially ignored him for most of the meeting but I had told him to expect this and he was thrilled. The managers were excited by his work and were taking the opportunity to talk about the implications while they were all in the same place. Rather than spend 20 minutes listening to his method, they immediately came up with a plan on how to apply his work and he got a front row seat! They politely deferred to him for the remaining part of the meeting so that he could excitedly summarize his method and the finer details of his results. I’ve learned that the senior managers trust our science and expect that we’re applying solid, peer-reviewed methods. They are far more interested in the results, as they should be!

                1. learnedthehardway*

                  I had to learn this as a baby recruiter – lead with the conclusions. Some helpful advice I got early on was that I was providing too much detail about the candidates I was presenting.

                  While counter-intuitive, exhaustive notes and details tend to be read as a lack of confidence in your findings.

                  I still take very detailed notes, but my candidate write-ups are concise and just hit the high points.

                2. Elitist Semicolon*

                  I used to teach scientific writing and emphasized that students should tell me their conclusion/recommendation at the start of a presentation/in the executive summary. That way, I (or another reader/audience) would go in already armed with a reason to think the rest of the argument was important. Professional writing isn’t a mystery novel; we’re not reading it for funsies or to be surprised by the unexpected twist. Readers are lazy and audiences have short attention spans; folks are gonna tune out after a few minutes of a presentation if they don’t know where it’s going.

                3. HQetc*

                  This isn’t exactly the same, but has shades of “I’m going to tell you what I”m going to tell you, then I’m going to tell you, then I’m going to tell you what I told you.” Signposts up front, conclusion/reminders at the end.

              2. Jen with one n*

                oh, this reminds me of advice I got when I took a course on how to write briefing notes (not something I do in my role, but still interesting info). Lead with your conclusions, then give me the evidence to support it.

                LW, as a communications director with over 20 years of experience in government writing (10+ as a speechwriter and media relations person), you need to listen to your manager’s advice and take your ego out of it. Adjusting your writing to suit your audience is one of the most important skills to have when it comes to someone working in a communications field. It’s not about your manager being “intimidated” by your vocabulary, it’s about her knowing who’s on the receiving end of your text and making sure you’re meeting their needs. If she’s spending significant amounts of her day rewriting your text, you’re not going to be there long.

                1. Jen with one n*

                  Oh and to add – plain language is considered to be roughly grade 5-level reading comprehension, and I suggest you try to run your writing through some of the editor checkers before you submit it to see what level it’s coming out at. Microsoft word has one built in.

                2. rebelwithmouseyhair*

                  This is so exhilarating to read. The French go about it in the opposite way: they give a barrage of reasons and finally, the conclusion. I turn it all upside down in my translation into English, and they don’t like it because they don’t recognise their text, their logical train of thought. A client who gives me really interesting work for a top Paris art museum just told me I need to stick to the same order of ideas… it just doesn’t work in English. I asked whether they wanted comfort or for their foreign visitors to enjoy the exhibition… and told them to dumb their texts down into sentences of no more than two lines, if they wanted to be able to find their way around my translations. And maybe ask the artists to produce simpler work, so they don’t have to write such complex sentences about the works. After all, translation is an art, not a science, which makes me an artist, so asking me not to perform my art to the best of my ability amounts to that.

                3. MigraineMonth*

                  @rebelwithmouseyhair – I’ve heard that in French, if they want to really emphasize an idea, they make the sentence very long. From my one (doomed) foray into French philosophy, that seemed to be true.

                  English doesn’t.

          3. Learn ALL the things*

            I work in state government in a position that requires me to interact with elected officials at all levels, and I think there’s a point 1b that we can add to your list. Even for people who admit that overall adult reading comprehension is low (the average American reads at a 6th grade level, after all), it’s sometimes hard to let go of the belief that surely the people who run our government won’t have that problem. But there are no educational requirements to run for office. It’s not like being a doctor or a lawyer or a teacher where you have to pass an exam before you can have the job. Get enough people to sign your petition to get on the ballot and you’re in.

            I have had some extremely long phone calls with elected officials where I have to explain the same concept in four or five ways before they start to sound like they understand. When my office puts out a report, we use standardized language to make it easier for our primary audience of elected officials to understand. When we have a situation that goes outside of our standardized language, we will frequently spend quite a bit of time debating the best way to word it, and the report will go through several layers of cold readers before it goes public.

            Writing for the public as well as for elected officials is hard work, and it requires the writer to be extremely clear and concise. I have a background in writing similar to OP’s and I needed to unlearn a lot of things when I started this job. It’s not as easy as people assume it will be when they start out.

            1. Lisa Simpson*

              I’ve been in meetings with my city councilor and that man is dumb as a post. I get second hand embarrassment just listening to him present. It’s terrible.

          4. metadata minion*

            Yes! I love complex writing filled with $5 words…when I’m reading for pleasure. If I’m reading documentation or a report at work, I want it to be clear, succinct, and easy to read.

            LW, if it helps — think of sign design. You might have beautiful calligraphy skills, but if you’re making a directional sign, you need to use those skills to make simple, bold lines that are easy to read from a distance. 19th century blackscript with all the fancy little swirls on the capitals is beautiful, but illegible.

          5. Zelda*

            “Some writers seem to think if they can drag in plenty of long or unfamiliar or technical or modish words, arranged in long and involved sentences, their readers will regard them as clever fellows and be stunned into acquiescence. Not so: most readers will be more likely to think ‘This man is a pompous ass. I’m not going to agree with him if I can help it.’” (Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, 1954)

            “Omit needless words.” –William Strunk

            1. Margaret Cavendish*

              I laughed at that too – Mr Gowers certainly used a lot of words to tell his readers to be concise!

              And also it’s a really interesting example of how writing changes for different audiences, at different times. That paragraph seems to be pretty typical of 1950’s writing, and it probably was plain language and accessible to his readers at the time. It’s only from our perspective now that it starts to look “modish.”

              1. I&I*

                I was much amused by Gowers’s peacocking, actually. The way he wrote made it plain to the reader that yes, he can use words like ‘acquiescence’ perfectly comfortably, and yet when he has a punch to deliver it lands harder when he doesn’t. He’s showing he’s afraid of long words, he just thinks they aren’t useful here.

                Even the sentence structure is part of the joke. Look at the first sentence, condemning ‘long and involved’ sentences: 39 words broken up into three subclauses. He’s demonstrating a mild example of what he’s talking about. Then he contrasts it with the reader’s thoughts: two sentences, the first only 6 words and the second 12, each a single unbroken statement.

                It’s like he’s doing voices. ‘If you over-complicate your statements [gesticulating elegantly], my esteemed but sesquipidalian acquaintances, then you may anticipate the bedazzlement of your pusillanimous audience. [Switches accent.] The truth is you’ll just piss them off.’

              2. Zelda*

                To be fair, the later editions of _The Elements of Style_ have explications from E.B. White that explain why it’s a good rule and how to identify which words are needless, which starts to look more like Mr Gowers’s paragraph. One is nonetheless amused.

              3. Wayward Sun*

                “How to Win Friends & Influence People” by Dale Carnegie is another interesting example. It’s not a hard read, but it does word things in a much more formal way than a self-help book would now.

            2. Festively Dressed Earl*

              Faulkner on Hemingway: “He has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.”

              Hemingway on Faulkner: “Poor Faulkner. Does he really think big emotions come from big words?”

          6. Margaret Cavendish*

            OP1, I would also recommend Apolitical, which has a ton of free courses on effective communication in government. (Also strategic thinking, policy analysis, and subject-specific topics – it’s a great resource for anyone working in the public service!)

          8. becca*

            Really happy to see someone bring up Plain English! It’s helpful for people with disabilities, people who speak English as a second language, people with varying levels of education, and people who are just trying to read quickly and internalize the main points. I wish more people used it.

        3. Justin*

          It’s funny as a trained academic I write very conversationally and some academics look down their nose at me and yet I’m the one with the non-academic book deals and public speaking side career.

          Yes I’m bragging but also it’s a valid point!

          1. Alexander Graham Yell*

            I was never able to write a formal academic paper, and had one teacher tell me my writing style is, “Hey buddy, let me tell you about this cool thing I just learned.” Academic writing is HARD and seems designed to make even the smartest people in the room feel dumb at least 80% of the time.

            1. merlinite*

              Me too, I’m very concise writer, and really struggled in my first year of college trying to write essays that met the word count but without being fluffy. Why can’t I just get to the point?! Then I switched to broadcasting, where I was writing for the ear and constantly removing words from my pieces, which suited me much better. It’s not dumbing down to write that way, it’s a different kind of skill.

            3. Insulindian Phasmid*

              In your defense I just read an entire book about bees like that (OMFG, BEES!
              Bees Are So Amazing and You’re About to Find Out Why)

            4. Margaret Cavendish*

              >>seems designed to make even the smartest people in the room feel dumb

              Yes! Same with legal writing. Lawyers write primarily for other lawyers, and if the rest of us can’t understand it – that’s a feature, not a bug.

            5. Table It and Circle Back*

              I was beginning to wonder if I was the only person who thinks “academic writing” can generally be described as “dense to the point of opacity for no particular reason.” I get so frustrated with folks who think that an article is only important if it takes 20 minutes to understand one paragraph.

              1. Maisonneuve*

                Yeah, good academic writing needs to be easily understood. Otherwise what’s the point? Research circling the drain because no one reads it?

                1. MigraineMonth*

                  Now I feel the need to defend specialized vocabulary. Some concepts are complicated and the specialized vocabulary arose to fill those needs. I’m never going to be able to understand most chemistry research, not because it’s written densely, but because I don’t have a background in chemicals or chemical processes. As long as chemists are explaining what they’re doing to other chemists, using the terminology they share is both appropriate and efficient. (I love Thing Explainer by Randall Monroe, but I think we can all agree that it’s clearer to say “submarine” than “boat that sometimes goes under the water but doesn’t sink” even if the latter has less-specialized vocabulary.)

            6. Justin*

              It took me 6 years after my MA to apply for my EdD because I was convinced I wasn’t smart enough to write that way.

              Eventually I figured out I was skilled enough to know NOT to write that way.

          2. Myrin*

            Yeah, I was considered an excellent academic writer while also getting “too casual!” remarks all throughout my decade in the field. My natural writing style is still more academic than your Average Joe’s but I’ve always been really passionate about making concepts, porcesses, etc. as understandable as possible to everyone.

            Funnily, at conferences, “real”, passionate, hewn-in-stone academics always looked at me like I’m some big dumbo because I hated speaking with what I called “latinised” jargon, whereas among non-academics, I was often called “the brain” who was way too intelligent and well-spoken for the masses. The duality of man, I guess.

            Looking at it now with a few years in government-but-still-academia-adjacent-in-some-way under my belt, I think it’s exactly that “too casual!” writing which now has people praising me for my easily understandable explanations of more-or-less complex topics (and thanking me, even! This comes up a surprising amount, where both coworkers and citizens are half brought to tears because they don’t understand something and I happen to be near and am able to explain it more clearly). Adapt, adapt, adapt!

            1. ferrina*

              Yeah, it’s all about audience. Most people prefer plain language, but there will always be some subgroups that like other styles. I do a lot of writing for a corporate audience, most of whom tend to be highly educated. 90% prefer my plain language summaries, 5% just genuinely like more dense content, and 5% look down their nose at people that don’t use the same language they do (whether that’s academia or corporate jargon). I’m fluent in corporate jargon, and every so often I need to pull out all the acronyms and buzzwords so that Certain Person will actually listen to me. It’s not about whether my writing is “right or wrong” – it’s all about connecting with your particular audience.

              1. anotherfan*

                It’s hard to write for everybody, especially when your training has been for a specific subset of people. But OP, you’ve moved jobs now. Your boss has (one hopes) more experience in THAT job and is giving you the benefit of their experience and you’re sidelining it because you feel somehow you’re smarter than they are or something. It’s not about brains. It’s about getting a point across. Nobody is going to read your beautifully written eight-page memo, they’ll just roll their eyes and move on. It’s about speed and understanding, especially in politics when someone asks your governor a loaded question and is waiting for them to slip up so they can play “gotcha!” Even spending a minute looking through their notes looks like they’re stalling for time. Look at the big picture. It’s not about your skills, but about your ability to give your boss/governor/whomever enough facts in a simple way so they have answers. You can save your academic writing for your novel.

                I’ve been in newspapers for decades and been an editor for a while now and the hardest thing our new reporters have to learn is to write for clarity, especially the ones right out of college who are functioning under “the more words the better” rules for class papers and who are desperate to write complex topics in passive tense. Nobody has the time for that in the real world.

              2. Superfluous and Sassy*

                What a great approach to jargon – use it when it makes certain people listen to you. On principle I avoid using jargon because I think it makes people sound like pompous asses. But, if I’m trying to get the attention of a pompous ass, maybe I should throw in a few jargon words.

                1. ferrina*

                  Absolutely.

                  The most extreme case I ever had was working with a VP who use jargon to mark his territory. Once he considered you worth his time, he would initiate a conversation where he would talk super fast and would use as much jargon as he could. He would also talk super, super fast, so most people would be stunned by the onslaught of weird words. Then he’d walk away, convinced of his own superiority (because confusing everyone around you is clearly a mark of intelligence /s).
                  He was not ready for me. I’m ADHD and my mouth and brain like to move at hyperspeed. I grew up with a narcisistic grandfather who loved to use obscure and obtuse lexicon to posture, and I had just come from a job where my boss spoke exclusively in jargon. I didn’t know it, but I had been training for that moment. I matched his vibe and immediately responded back at the same speed and terminology that he was using. He blinked and said “huh, I’ll think about that” and walked away, befuddled. He avoided me after that.

                  The best/worst part? This dude that liked to show “dominance” through crappy communication was the Head of Marketing and Communications.

          3. Lilo*

            Academic writing can also be extremely quirky. For instance the methods section of chemistry papers is written in the most convoluted passive voice I’ve ever encountered (“To a 5 mL solution of Ethan was added…”).

                3. SarahKay*

                  @Zelda, one of the funniest things I ever read was a friend emailing me about a great new scottish whisky he’d tried that weekend, called “Bruichladdich (take that, you spell-checker, you!)”.

            2. Koala*

              I need to take my laptop to IT because some of the keys are sticking but I am embarrassed to do so, I wonder if using the passive voice would help: Yogurt was spilled.

        4. el l*

          In academia, your job is usually to say “it’s complicated.”

          In the real world, your job is to correctly simplify the situation to such a degree that you can quickly say what concrete thing to do. It’s a way higher bar.

          1. i like hound dogs*

            This is such a good way of putting it! I think there’s also a baked-in tendency for academics to think they’re the smartest people in the room.

            I find it easier to write in academic mode, but my job would kill me if I came at them with that nonsense, lol.

        5. Chris*

          “even when you know your audience has a high level of reading ability, non-academic language is still usually stronger writing”

          Good legal briefs don’t use language like “Henceforth” and “whereto-for.” They convey complex concepts in plain language.

          1. Karl Havoc*

            Yes. And do you know who says so more than anyone? Judges. I’ve never heard a judge *not* say this when asked about legal writing advice. Not because they or their clerks are dumb, but because they are busy and have a lot to read and know that it is very important for them to understand exactly what you mean to say. There are few things more frustrating than getting a bad ruling that you can tell is based on a misunderstanding of your arguments.

          2. Wilbur*

            Patents are written in a language that appears to be English at first glance but requires painstaking translation to make sense.

            1. rebelwithmouseyhair*

              As a translator, I can vouch for the fact that when translating patents into English, I am not allowed to write in a way that would be easy for English people to grasp. I have to stick as closely as possible to the French. I don’t know why, but this is why I refuse to translate patents.

            2. MigraineMonth*

              One of my Computer Science college professors was encouraged to patent the result of his research, a particular type of classification AI algorithm. The college hired someone to rewrite the patent application for him so that it would be sufficiently legalistic. As a result, my professor has no idea what he actually holds the patent for. His best guess is that the person rewriting it became confused and the patent is for some type of physical machine with parts and gears rather than an algorithm.

        6. A perfectly normal-size space bird*

          Especially once you account for different native languages. I co-wrote a science textbook and had to rewrite all my notes to the graphic designers. They all had advanced degrees and some had even authored academic papers but they were ESL speakers in another country and had trouble understanding the English academic writing I used. Once I switched to plain language, they had no issues.

          1. MigraineMonth*

            I read that ESL speakers can generally communicate much more easily with each other than with those who speak English as a first language. It described a situation where some employees who spoke French, Arabic, Swahili and Mandarin as first languages were collaborating in their common language, English. Everything was going well until a man who spoke English as a first language joined them. No one could understand him because he was using so many idioms, references to American football and other figurative language that the ESL speakers hadn’t learned.

      2. there are chickens in the trees*

        For technical writers, it’s often standard to use Simplified Technical English (STE) for all documentation. STE is a controlled language with a limited vocabulary and restricted writing rules. For someone not used to it, it’s a whole new way of writing and may feel confining, but it’s best for communicating procedures etc. to an audience with a wide variety of technical expertise, and also for translation to other languages. One of my first managers also recommended using it for writing emails, and it really is the best way to get your point across.

      3. Media Monkey*

        i spend a lot of time doing what is probably seen as “dumbing down” the writing of new employees right out of university. i find a lot of new grads write in a way they think sounds intelligent but actually needs a lot of clarifying when it’s being sent to clients who are not experts in the field (as that’s what they pay us for!). i always try to remind them of the end goal – that the client understands what you are trying to say with minimal back and forth. not a perfect piece of high level writing!

        1. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

          Exactly this. Plus, writing which meets a lot of clarifying is very far from “perfect.” If they’re perfectionists about their writing they should want it to be good, not long.

        2. Snow Globe*

          I used to work with recent graduates, who seemed to have been trained to make documents as long as possible, due to many college writing assignments requiring a minimum number of words or pages. They were used to “padding” the writing with extra, unnecessary phrases, and really needed training to learn to write directly to the point.

      4. Antilles*

        (and why is it “audience” with quotation marks?).
        In the context of the sentence and how annoyed OP seems to be, I think the quotation marks are used to indicate sarcasm, rather than something like (eye-roll) or (sigh) or etc.

        It’s also possible that it’s simply that the boss used the exact words “voice” and “audience” so the quotation marks are used to indicate that they’re direct quotes. But I doubt it given OP’s overall attitude from the letter.

      5. I edit everything*

        Yes! I work at a good-sized public university and was tasked with revising a brochure aimed at high school students and their parents. The old version was so confusing, with complicated sentence structures and specialized language. It was clear to me that academic-style writing was not appropriate for the audience. It was hard to follow, even for me, and the opposite of engaging.
        I took a much more conversational, inviting approach, and if I may toot my own horn, vastly improved the readability and the sharing of information.
        Then the associate provost got hold of it and undid a lot of what I’d done. Sigh.

      6. not nice, don't care*

        I work in academia but do not have a degree. I grew up often being ‘the smartest person in the room’ and learned to use plain English in explaining complex things to friends & family.
        Now I still have the habit of using plain English, even when speaking to/with academic types, but oddly enough get complimented on being able to get concepts across simply and concisely.

    3. ADHDFox*

      I highly recommend using a tool like Grammarly to help shape your register – the paid versions have quite nuanced settings which can also help shape your writing style.

      1. Testing*

        Even the free versions of Chat-GPT do this really well. Do make sure not to put any sensitive/secret information in there, though (not even pasted into the window, it reads it even before you hit enter).

        1. Alpacas Are Not Dairy Animals*

          ChatGPT is bad for precision, though, as it frequently substitutes not-quite-right synonyms. What seems like the exact sort of thing that would increase LW’s resistance to changing her writing in general.

          1. Lenora Rose*

            It also means they’re not actually learning how and why to simplify their writing. It’s fast in theory but it doesn’t actually retrain the writer into improving their style.

      2. The Prettiest Curse*

        Hemingway Editor is a similar tool, and there are websites which will tell you which grade (reading level) can comprehend your writing. If one of these tells OP that their writing is only accessible with people to a graduate degree, that’s a problem.

        1. me*

          I came here to say Hemingway Editor is great for simplifying sentences. I used it extensively when I wrote for websites that needed text to be at a 10th grade level or lower so that it was accessible to more people.

          I also agree with others that if you can write simply, it’s easier to understand and you demonstrate a greater mastery of the subject. One professor in law school challenged us to write essays without using any conjunctions for this reason.

        2. Insulindian Phasmid*

          It’s not foolproof though! I use Hemmingway in my day job and it has no idea what an adverb is. All it knows is you should never use them, ever. So it’ll flag everything from properly (!) used adverbs to verbs like “to fly” and actor Carson Daly. (If it ends in -ly, it gets a flag. Hemmingway. Please. Please give me an option to tell you you’re wrong…)

      3. Seeking Second Childhood*

        Microsoft word has a tool for determining grade level of a piece of writing.

        I highly recommend that over any AI.

        2. Pastor Petty Labelle*

          This.

          OP I am going to be blunt here. You are on a formal improvement plan. One of the requirements is to make your writing less formal. You have two choices — change your writing style or find a new job. That’s it.

          No one is going to stand up and applaud that you stood up for formal writing in a non-formal writing setting. No one is going to commend your extensive vocabulary and linguistic choices at the unemployment office.

          You have received direct feedback from your boss about what you need to improve. Your response is to be offended that your fine academic style is not appreciated.

          You need to write for the masses, not your academic colleagues. This doesn’t mean dumb. It means different. You can demonstrate how good your vocabulary really is by adapting.

          1. cee*

            Yes, this! It seems the OP sees academic writing as better rather than different. Academic writing isn’t a “level” that is superior to other types of writing.

            Using the correct style for the audience and context is what makes writing superior, not long words and complex phrasing.

            I’m saying this as someone who works in academia and grant writing

            (I do wonder whether the OP would consider Hemingway a poor communicator, given his “dumbed down”, plain writing. )

          2. Ace in the Hole*

            This isn’t even an issue of formal vs informal… it’s that LW is using the *wrong* formal.

            It’s the writing equivalent of showing up at a funeral in a pink evening gown. No matter how beautiful or well-made the dress is, it is the wrong style of dress. You’d be better off in something the right style no matter how cheap, ugly, and poorly-made.

    4. Santiago*

      Check out the Plain Language movement in the government (US context) and Global English. I consider of reading level and directness as an accessibility measure for the public, and if you actually want to get good at plain language / global English writing, then you have to practice and work towards it.

      Learning these tools is also a good way to sidestep the AI: you won’t need it when you can reference these principals.

      2. Jennifer @unchartedworlds*

        This is what I was thinking of too!

        LW1, writing in Plain English is a professional skill.

        1. Quinalla*

          Came here to say this! Don’t think of writing in plain language as dumbing it down (I know these are the words of your boss) but as writing in a way that is clear and concise and takes real skill and practice to get good at. It’s actually quite difficult to do. Also, AI can be very helpful here. You don’t just plug in the words and ask for plain language and take exactly what it spits out, but take it and edit it carefully as sometimes a more precise word is what is needed, etc. It will help you figure out how to write in plainer English.

          There are also things in Word and other programs that will give you a score on clarity and conciseness – these can help as well!

          And in general, learning to write for different audiences is important too. I write a lot of short papers at my job where I have an executive summary which is plain, concise and without much if any technical detail – it’s a summary of the rest of the paper in a page or two including recommendations. This needs to be readable by anyone with any level of technical knowledge. Then a detailed portion that documents all the technical detail and is only really meant to be read by folks with higher level technical knowledge. A lot of folks I work with can only write the 2nd part, they can’t figure out how to write the 1st.

        2. skadhu*

          Yes! and hard, as others have said.

          Every once in a while I run across someone explaining a complex topic in particularly clear, concise language, and I have FAR more respect for those writers than those who can write traditional academic-speak. It really is a skill worth developing.

          On another note—re the reference to “audience” in quotes, whether intentional or not, it does sound like OP thinks the whole concept of writing for an audience is BS. The word itself is often overused or mis-used in simplified or over-complicated ways that obscure its meaning and usefulness (thank you branding jargon applied to everything in the world) but the concept of defining the needs of a group of people who are receiving a message, and what that means for effective communication, is actually very important. I would recommend that OP look into communications theory to get a better sense of how audience and voice work in different contexts—there’s plenty of research out there (in both academic and plain English variants).

          1. Observer*

            but the concept of defining the needs of a group of people who are receiving a message, and what that means for effective communication, is actually very important.

            Very much this. LW, try to think of “audience” as a concept similar to the concepts of “constituency” and “customer / client base”.

            All of these address the concept that there a group of people that you are trying to reach, with a product, a service, or information. And just as the different needs and desires of different groups are not necessarily a sign of relative intelligence, the different communications needs of different groups is not a reflection of their intelligence. And *correctly* tailoring your product, service, or communications style to your target group is a *far* more solid indicator of your intelligence and education than insisting on using a *single* style for all groups. It’s refusing to differentiate that makes you look either less smart or insecure.

          2. MigraineMonth*

            Something else I’ve found very important in my own work is that when you have a particular audience in mind, you should not only be writing for their level but for their interests. What does your audience care most about?

            If you’re writing about a long-term study on sodium and heart health and your audience is cardiology researchers, they care about methodology and reproducibility. If your audience is cardiologists, they care most about the resulting changes in guidance around when they should prescribe blood pressure medication or low-sodium diets. If your audience is people at risk for heart disease, they care most about the advice for how to reduce sodium in their diets.

            If you’re telling the people at risk for heart disease all about the methodology–even in language they understand–you aren’t communicating well for that audience.

        3. cmdrspacebabe*

          Another vote for this! I work in communications in a (non-US) federal government context and we also push to use pretty much 100% plain language in all our communications – internal and external. I do a loooot of coaching on this because people coming from an academic background really struggle with the idea that they’re no longer trying to reach a word count – they’re trying to fit a word limit (I got a head start by drafting social media as my first job, back in the days of the 180 character Twitter post).

          By writing at a basic reading level, you extend the accessibility of your writing to a much wider base, including people with disabilities (cognitive, visual processing, etc.), people reading in a second language, people without the same educational background, or just people who have better things to do than sift through an essay-length paragraph that’s only communicating a single basic concept. In this context, there isn’t actually any benefit to the kind of vocabulary LW1 is doing – it’s not going to make the information any easier to understand, and being understood is all it’s there for.

          1. A perfectly normal-size space bird*

            Part of my current job is evaluating high school student science essays. You can always tell the students who are practicing for college because they use multiple paragraphs and the most convoluted way to say “because of inertia.” Which is why we have a hard rule that word count does not determine demonstration of conceptual knowledge. It’s the hardest rule for my minions to grasp. They see three pages with lots of terminology and automatically think “wow that kid’s really smart!” without realizing that kid said a whole lot of nothing.

        4. Echo*

          Yes! A lot of my coworkers come from academia, and our house style is more like Plain English. It’s very direct and fairly conversational. I’ve noticed that a lot of junior staff have tied their pride and identity to their writing. So I tell the junior staff I supervise that “CompanyName writing” is a different skill from “writing”. If you get a lot of edits from me, it’s not me telling you that you’re a bad writer. It’s me teaching you a new skill.

      3. Harper the Other One*

        +1 to Plain Language – there are excellent resources available (both free and paid certificates/training) and it is extremely valuable to learn.

        1. Hazel*

          Yes, don’t let anyone tell you that plain and simple language is a plain and simple thing to produce. Ask for training. You need it and it shows you are willing to get on board. It’s a disservice to tell people to just write plainly without teaching them – as big a disservice as expecting any other technical skill like bookkeeping.

          Plain language writing uses specific techniques – avoiding passives, nominalisations, clauses, etc – as well as the obvious things like shorter sentences and the $2 word instead of the $20 one.

      4. CatLaw*

        Yes! Came here to say this. I’m a lawyer and first encountered the Plain Language movement working with people in poverty who had low literacy or were not native English speakers. I now use it in everything, including legal briefs on highly complex matters. It’s made my writing a thousand times better – more accessible, interesting, and understandable, among other things. It’s a skill to learn that will upgrade your writing, not downgrade it. PlainLanguage dot gov is a great place to start looking for resources and training.

      5. Newbie bureaucrat*

        I just started a job in state government, and we have an official policy to use plain language in written and verbal communications. I had a little onboarding training module on it and everything. I thought it was cool, ensuring that government communications are accessible to the general public.

      6. The Rise and Fall of Sanctuary Moon*

        Yes! I came here to link to the plain language guidelines. I am an editor in a very technical area that publishes for the general public. We refer to the plain language guidelines every single day.
        Based on the letter, I think OP is not performing an essential function of their job by insisting on convoluted writing. They need to reframe this in their head before they lose this job.

    5. A Person*

      Yes, this. I’ve worked in academia, including a role where I had to edit things written by academics supposedly for a general audience. There’s a specific writing style used in a lot of academia, which outside that context comes off as long-winded, confusing and stodgy. Unfortunately many academics struggle to get out of that writing mode, even when they’re trying to write for laypeople. It’s like how some business people can’t stop using awful business jargon even in their personal conversations.

      In the US I believe the Plain Writing Act (2010) actually requires federal agencies to use plain language so that people can understand what the government is trying to tell them. So if you’re interacting with politicians or federal funding bodies, it makes a lot of sense for your manager to ask you to use simpler language!

      1. LadyAmalthea*

        Echoing the plain language requirement in a Government setting – I work in the Irish Civil Service, and that is a requirement for all official writing. The unified writing style also means that in a job where there is necessarily a ton of reusing bits of text in different documents, you can do a heck of a lot more copy paste and a heck of a lot less rewriting and editing, which is incredibly important with tight deadlines.

        1. Anneke*

          I work for a public sector organisation in New Zealand and all our external communications and materials are subject to the Plain Language Act. Because of that, it’s just easier to hold our internal communications to the same standard so we can keep that consistent voice.

      2. Anax*

        Totally agreed; I’m adjacent to academia and it can be… a lot.

        I’ve worked in academia and government – 90% of my current coworkers are PhDs, a few are the sort of people who have to drop everything and brief federal agencies in D.C. on short notice. When they aren’t writing formal, academic works, they don’t write like this – you would never guess from the way they speak or write that they’re well-regarded researchers.

        LW, you sound like someone who really values precision in language – but your precision is coming at the *expense* of clarity.

        The academic register, with its peculiar sentence structure and language, requires the reader to slow down and focus in a manner unusual for ordinary writing. This register requires greater utilization of short-term memory, because a more complex sentence structure and more circuitous language – as exemplified in this sentence, which one might regard as a “run-on” – requires the reader expend more effort to parse your complete thought before moving on. Any circumstance which impairs short-term memory in the reader – tiredness, distraction, lack of time, lack of interest – will make this language difficult or impossible to parse, because the initial thought is lost before the end is reached.

        Are you truly willing to jeopardize your message by gambling that the governor is not too tired, distracted, rushed, or disinterested to parse your language? Certainly, they are likely *capable* of reading it, under ideal circumstances – but how often is a governor’s day ideal?

        You’re the writer, LW; it’s your job to get the message across, whether you have to do it in formal language or freaking semaphore. No one is grading your artistry here. Sorry.

        (Honestly, also – the inappropriate use of formal language really just reads to me as immaturity, because I most often see it used by kids fresh out of college who haven’t really learned to code-switch yet – including me, at that age. It makes me think you’re like, 23. This is probably not the impression you want.)

        As an example, in case it’s helpful, here’s how I would write your letter.

        “Two years ago, I moved from academia to a state agency. I still teach part-time at the university, but my “day job” involves writing grant proposals, contracts, and policy.

        My direct manager thinks that I write in an inaccessible, intimidating way – to the point that it’s in my formal improvement plan. She’s even talked about using ChatGPT to reword my writing for clarity.

        I don’t think my writing is intimidating at all – I’m hardly writing like an ivory tower academic! I’m actually really proud of the way I write.

        Is it fair for me to be offended? Or am I in the wrong?”

        1. Lindumgirl*

          I couldn’t agree more about the kids fresh out of college. I’m a lawyer. We always find it’s the young, newly qualifieds, who use overly formal or flowery language in letters.

          1. Lilo*

            I’m a lawyer and when another attorney uses overly complex language, they’re usually trying to hide something.

            1. Pastor Petty Labelle*

              I used Writ of Ne Exeat once and the judge looked at me and said, you could have just used injunction Counselor. I had a good relationship with the judge so I could say I did not go to law school for 3 years to not use Latin. I still use Writ of Ne Exeat but most of my writing is pretty plain.

              1. Lilo*

                The funny thing is in casual conversations lawyers tend to just use case names. “No, I wouldn’t argue that because of Miller” or “How do you satisfy the Newbridge factor”.

          2. brjeau*

            The college thing is so real! I still cringe thinking about the first work email I sent to potential project partners for my organization at my first job fresh out of college. Several full paragraphs explaining the context and goals of the program, with an ask probably in the closing paragraph. It’s a miracle I got any responses at all.

            1. Anax*

              SAME. My first summer job in college involved explaining prevailing wage law to construction workers. I still cringe thinking about all those baffled, grizzled old dudes, reading my carefully-crafted formal language.

              I learned a LOT in that job.

              (Prevailing wage law, briefly, says that on government contracts, construction companies need to pay a “normal” wage to their workers. They can’t get the contract by shipping in a bunch of unemployed electricians from out of state, paying them minimum wage, and pocketing the profits. This was a big problem in the Great Depression, especially because government contracts were at least half designed to keep the local economy running. My job was to get grumpy old dudes to tell us what they were paying their employees, so we could find out that “normal” wage – and “hey, please do a bunch of government paperwork out of the blue” is not something they wanted to hear!)

        2. Green great dragon*

          Echoing this. LW’s writing style is lovely to read over breakfast. But for a busy politician skimming a doc, I’d want it half the length or less.

          That’s literally how I do it. My natural style’s closer to LW’s letter above (though not nearly as smooth). For politicians, I edit ruthlessly and usually halve the length without losing any information, and make it more direct.

        4. Stunner266*

          Thank you Anax, spot on.

          It was honestly hard work just reading OPs letter, let alone whatever they are writing for their job!

        5. Lily*

          As a friend once said to me: “it is a sign of intelligence to be able to explain a complicated matter in simple words. It is not always a sign of intelligence to explain a simple matter in complicated words.” (vaguely translated from my mother tongue, me not native to English)

          1. Anax*

            We have some similar turns of phrase in English – “If you can’t explain it to a six-year-old, then you don’t understand it well enough” is one of my favorites.

        6. M*

          Came here to check someone had done a worked-example rewrite to illustrate – this is a very good one. No substantive information lost, half the length, and even faster than that to read.

          OP1, I’m also infected with bug of picking the “most right” word and phrasing for what I mean, and it’s taken real work to tame that down when writing professionally. But ultimately, good professional writing is *efficient* professional writing.

          Most government and legislative bodies have page limits on briefings, often very short ones. If you’re taking longer to make one point, you’re going to communicate fewer points in total, and possibly leave your governor missing crucial information.

          Even if there isn’t a page limit, or you think you’ve squeezed everything you need to in – busy people skim because they have to. You’re risking the people you’re writing for simply putting your work in the “too hard” basket, or missing crucial information because they don’t have time to parse everything you’ve written.

        7. Verity Kindle*

          In my experience (academic humanities), there’s an incentive for academic writing to be dense because using large words and terse phrases means you can express more concepts within the word limit of your article/book, and thus it makes a bigger contribution to the field (the main metric of good academic writing). But as others have pointed out, this comes at the expense of clarity, the goal of the writing OP1 is being asked to produce now.

          OP1 might find it helpful to think of the writing they’re doing now as being in a different genre to academic communication. It’s for a different purpose, and thus the qualities that make it ‘good’ are also different. And being able to write well in different genres or registers is a sign of being a good communicator. When I was writing my PhD, I also volunteered at a group that taught my field to teenagers. It made me better at academic communication because it forced me to think about how to contextualise ideas and show their relevance for my audience -skills that make a conference paper much more engaging to listen to!

          1. anonymous anteater*

            There is also a much charitable interpretation: many academics start out reading or hearing material that leaves them completely lost until they get deeper into a subject. The unconscious lesson learned is that academic communication is done right when it takes significant effort and expertise to follow, and conversely is not done right when everyone in the room understands. It’s of course a great gatekeeping technique, and I am convinced that many people adopt it unintentionally.

            1. anonymous anteater*

              much LESS charitable, is what I meant to say. That’s in addition to Verity’s density point, also very true!

        8. Rock Prof*

          Your example is great! It’s pretty academic of me, but I had never thought about the change in pace in reading just for to the writing style, not even the content. But my brain saw your ‘academic register’ paragraph and immediately switched pace.
          This reminds me a bit of when I was learning past tense German and felt like I had to wait forever to discover the verb at the end.

          1. Anax*

            It’s wild, right?

            Reading “A Wizard of Earthsea” really brought the pace difference home for me – le Guin’s work is objectively lovely, but it requires the same kind of pace change. (At least for me!)

            Sometimes, I just want a quick read which isn’t so poetic and information-dense. And definitely, if I’m half-awake or reading over lunch, I am NOT going to process that sort of beautiful art.

        9. Observer*

          LW, you sound like someone who really values precision in language – but your precision is coming at the *expense* of clarity.

          I would argue that if you lose clarity, you lose precision. Sure, in the mind of the person *writing* it’s more precise. But if the person you are trying to communicate with does not completely understand what you just said, that is far less precise than a slightly more vague word.

          It’s like the writer thinks they are using a scalpel to get the most precise cut rather than a really sharp steak knife. But their effect winds up looking like they used a dull butter knife.

          1. Anax*

            That’s super fair – I totally agree that LW is losing the forest for the trees.

            By “precise”, I was thinking about the adversarial aspect of academic and legal language. There can’t be room for misinterpretation, even by a malicious reader looking for loopholes or nits to pick.

            Which is… not a reasonable way to write anything ELSE.

        10. A perfectly normal-size space bird*

          “The academic register, with its peculiar sentence structure and language, requires the reader to slow down and focus in a manner unusual for ordinary writing.”

          This is very true. When I’m reading academic papers, I don’t want to skim to grab a few concepts, I want to take my time and focus on the content. Academic writing makes it so I absolutely have to put all my focus into it, which is what I want when I’m reading them. But if I need some quick data, a conclusion, or summary of results, skimming a popular science article about the results is usually sufficient.

          Kinda same thing with reading fiction. Last night I tried to start a book by an author I really like. His writing style is very introspective and focuses on the inner musings of the main character, which can be very dense. When I started reading, I realized as much as I enjoyed his other books, at the moment I wasn’t in the mood for this style. I wanted something more like a quick distraction I could pick up, put down, and come back to a month later. The comedic fantasy book I read instead wasn’t less smart than the other, it just had a different voice and is what I needed at that moment.

      4. Falling Diphthong*

        “A confusing explanation is hiding something” is definitely something I’ve observed in people’s reactions to ballot initiatives.

        1. WellRed*

          They basically write ballot initiatives to say the opposite of what you want. “If you’re in favor of Big Proposal,, vote no.”

          2. Falling Diphthong*

            I gather that’s a rule: If you want your ballot initiative to pass, then use obscuring language the upshot of which is “A no vote will bring about the change I want.” People who can’t understand the initiative will vote “no.”

            In my own state the sample ballots are required to have a simple “A no vote would result in this” and “A yes vote would result in this,” which is usually enough to discern “This option retains the status quo, while this option changes it.” But that requirement was added for a reason.

            1. Casey*

              Gosh do we need this in California. Every measure is written with several negation clauses a la “measure A would forbid the practice of restricting allocation of revenue to political measures from entities that do not receive Medical funding” and then everyone just votes based on TV ads that say Measure A kills babies or whatever.

              1. Florence Reece*

                There’s a meme from 2020 that I shared a lot this election cycle:

                ‘California state ballot initiatives are worded like “Vote no if don’t not want thing to do not happen, or will” and if you fuck it up you legalize babies working for Instacart’

            2. iglwif*

              In Ontario where I live, many years ago we had a referendum on a new voting system for provincial elections — basically a form of ranked choice voting IIRC, but the important part is “not first-past-the-post”.

              It was a good system, I thought, but the promotional materials explaining it were … not very clear or very explanatory. More people voted “no” than “yes” and the consensus afterwards was that the electoral commission hadn’t explained the proposed new system either enough or clearly enough.

      5. iglwif*

        I was an academic copy editor for more than 20 years, and long-winded, confusing and stodgy is a spot-on description for a lot of the writing I encountered. A lot of factors feed into that, including “don’t say ‘we dissected the worms’, say ‘the worms were dissected'” and overusing field-specific jargon and — to be more charitable — trying really hard to convey nuance. The result is fine for other researchers, who are used to it, but absolutely does not work for a non-specialist audience.

        Tailoring your writing to specific audiences is a skill. Conveying complex concepts using clear and simple language is a skill. People get paid to do these things! OP’s boss is trying to help them continue to get paid.

    6. Keymaster of Gozer (She/Her)*

      I got similar feedback when I started to write articles for the knowledge base at work. Prior to that I’d been more used to writing lab reports and scientific papers which were heavy on the detail and very light on readability. So my first few were technically correct and very detailed but utterly useless to the target audience (other techies and end users).

      You have to have more than one writing mode. What helped me was, weirdly, writing fanfiction. That’s often a scenario where details matter (the fandom can get very irate about inaccuracies) but also it needs to be engaging and readable without a thesaurus. It was also a good practice in being able to take feedback and improve.

      1. Anax*

        Gosh, now I’m just thinking about those early-2000s fics which DID have a glossary at the end for their gratuitous Japanese. That takes me back.

    7. Nina*

      I’m coming from industry into academia and finding the transition from industry-appropriate writing to academic writing (in the same field!) really difficult. I imagine it’s similar in the opposite direction, but you have to do it.
      Also, it’s not clear what field LW1 is in, but writing dense paragraphs with long sentences and big words is not necessarily good academic writing either. Sometimes it’s what you need to do to hit a journal wordcount, but usually you can just… be reasonably formal and reasonably comprehensible.

    8. Diomedea Exulans*

      I also come from academia and my speaking/writing style wasn’t suitable even for that. I grew up in an old-school déclassé upper-middle class family (think not much money, but ancestors are in history books) and everyone in my family uses flowery language. That’s the style I’m used to and enjoy hearing or reading. Quite frankly, even today, the so-called plain language strikes me as boring and gimmicky, and that includes academic writing, even though it isn’t considered plain. But I work in software engineering and obviously can’t write documents in my own personal style.

      It’s important to realise that different industries and organisations have different styles (or voices, if you will), which you should adopt as an employee, especially if the mismatch is so serious that you are on a formal improvement plan for it. I strongly recommend that you take the feedback seriously and learn to write in the style that represents the voice of the organisation. As others have pointed out, it’s a skill that facilitates effective communication and that should be prioritised over your excessive pride in your highbrow vocabulary.

      But I would mildly disagree with some of the people here who mentioned that flowery or overly formal style is almost always the sign of immaturity. I know many not so young people (including myself) who have maintained that style over the years. Professional written communication is one thing, but in your casual conversations you can use any style you prefer – language isn’t strictly about communication after all, but the joy of indulging in the richness of vocabulary and the expression of your unique style as well. As long as your understood, you don’t need to change your style, just because some people find it intimidating.

    9. linger*

      “Academic” style is overrated even in academia, tbh.
      When I taught postgraduate thesis writing, I was at pains to emphasise to candidates that they should concentrate on expressing their ideas as clearly as possible, rather than on using a deliberately “academic” style. For several reasons, including:
      1. Supervisors, writing advisors, and peer reviewers can offer suggestions on improving your language, but their advice is reliable only if they understand your intended message. If your language is hard to understand, it will be harder to get helpful feedback.
      2. In a long-term project such as a thesis, you need to be able to understand your own writing when you read it back months later (e.g. when editing for your final submission, or preparing for your defense). So write now in a way that will help your future self.
      3. Examiners need to check how much you understand of your topic (and of others’ writing about it). You can best demonstrate this by explaining the content simply in your own words, and by being selective, and relevant, in your use of (properly marked and attributed) direct quotes.

    10. I&I*

      To quote Nathaniel Hawthorne, ‘Easy reading is damn hard writing.’ Expressing complex ideas in simple language is a real skill. It’s not one that academic writing teaches, but it’s okay that now it’s time for you to learn it. Approach it in the right spirit and you’ll find it’s a fascinating intellectual discipline!

      I wonder if part of your problem is this: sometimes feedback can be too impressionistic to be useful. People can tell you the vague feeling they get, but not the solution you should take. That’s not very helpful. Unfortunately, as any linguist will tell you, it’s also how most people work. Our *instincts* for language are formidable, but they happen at a level below conscious thought. This makes for feedback that’s absolutely right in identifying ‘something feels off,’ but unclear what would fix it.

      Well, I have a degree and I’m a published writer under my own name as well as having ghostwritten for professionals, so I’m going to give you a bit of actionable feedback to see if it helps.

      So let’s take an example that jumped out at me:

      ‘I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices’

      Okay, that’s obviously an educated vocabulary. You’ll probably have been getting feedback that this many polysyllables in such a small space is tiring for the reader, and that’s true. But I don’t think it’s the real problem. The trouble is, it’s not very clear.

      (I know it’s just one example, but examples show up our blind spots, and since it’s your clarity that’s being flagged up, let’s workshop it.)

      What do you mean by ‘inaccessible’? From context I presume you mean ‘hard to understand’ – but it could also mean ‘hostile to feedback’ or even ‘difficult to get in touch with.’ Contextually those makes less sense, but in the phrase ‘I am far from inaccessible’ – where you, not your writing, are the subject of the sentence – it’s the easier assumption to make grammatically.

      You see what I mean? The more abstract the phrasing, the easier to get confused. Little infelicities lead to big problems.

      If, on the other hand, you’d said something like, ‘My writing style and word choices are simple enough for most people to understand,’ you’d have said the exact same thing with less room for confusion. Would it have sounded more ‘dumb’? Not to anyone intelligent. Smart people understand that it’s about the ideas, not the diction.

      It’s always worth reading or rereading George Orwell’s ‘Politics and the English Language’ when you’re trying to refresh your habits. There’s a pdf of it here: http://www.public-library.uk/ebooks/72/30.pdf

      Consider his basic rules:

      (i) Never use a metaphor, simile or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
      (ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
      (iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
      (iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
      (v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English
      equivalent.
      (vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything barbarous.

      What could you do with those and the sentence I quoted?

      Well, ‘I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices’ could be trimmed to ‘I am accessible when it comes to style choices,’ or ‘My style choices are accessible’ and you wouldn’t lose much. ‘Communication’ and ‘linguistic’ are similar enough in meaning that it’s not a useful distinction for business writing, and since you’re talking about the style choices of your writing, both are implied.

      ‘I am far from inaccessible’ isn’t exactly the passive voice, but it runs into similar issues of distancing yourself from what you’re saying. What is the main point of this phrase? Is it to assert that you’re readable? In that case, an ‘I am’ rather than an ‘I am not’ would do that better. Is it to make a comparison between your style and a different one? If so, we need specifics. Using simpler words would force you into picking one or the other, which would clarify your point.

      I recognise that business-speak often demands jargon, so Orwell may just have to turn in his grave on that one, but if you can couch the business-speak among simpler phrasing it’ll flow more naturally. The last thing terms of art need is more obscure writing on top of them!

      I hope it doesn’t come across like I’m just picking on a sentence. Most of the rest of your letter was more readable than that, so I’m trying to flag up a place where change would help. Once a reader starts to feel confused it can be hard to get their attention back, so I think you may do well if you just look out for sticky places like this.

      Try doing that for a while and see if it helps you. Good luck!

      1. Katy*

        I love Politics and the English Language! I read it when I was sixteen and it completely rewired my idea of what good writing was. I wish everyone could read it before they get to college and get immersed in academic jargon.

      2. Diomedea Exulans*

        The only problem with feedback like the one you shared that it’s entirely subjective and heavily dependent on the audience. Yes, in technical writing, we prefer simplicity and a style that’s frankly quite boring.

        But, in general, I take pleasure in reading something that’s not the usual plain language. The sentence you highlighted from OP’s writing just sounds elegant to me and perfectly easy to understand. There is nothing convoluted or highly academic about it. Language is about aesthetics as well, not merely communication.

        Having said that, if OP’s job is to project the voice of their organisation, they should take such feedback seriously. But that doesn’t mean their writing isn’t as good, it’s just different.

        1. I&I*

          With respect, if a word is open to misinterpretation because its colloquial interpretation is dissonant with the necessary contextual conclusion, the elegance is questionable.

          Or, in plain English: it’s not elegant if risks confusing people.

          Which style you prefer in those two ways of saying the same thing is a matter of taste, but I stand by the point whichever way you put it. Clarity can be achieved with either long or short words, but it’s never not important.

          1. Diomedea Exulans*

            Well, I appreciate that, but with respect, I don’t see how OP’s sentence can be misinterpreted. It’s a pretty simple sentence with a simple meaning and slightly more elegantly and creatively expressed than usual.

            There are cases, of course, when the use of a more complicated word can cause misunderstanding, say, the use of “sanction” to mean “approve”. But the sentence taken from OP’s writing isn’t a good example to demonstrate the lack of clarity, in my opinion.

            1. I&I*

              If you’re arguing that style is subjective, I don’t think you can equate ‘polysyllabic’ with either elegance or creativity. Spare language can be elegant. It can take creativity to find the brief way. Polysyllables can be elegant, but they’re not the only way.

              As to why it was unclear, I think I explained why it read that way to me, twice, and there’s no point rehashing a third time.

            2. Joron Twiner*

              The subjective opinion that matters here is OP’s boss, who has said they are hard to understand. It’s not their job to write elegantly or creatively, so they need to dumb it down.

        2. biobotb*

          But the LW isn’t writing for other people’s pleasure. She’s supposed to be conveying information.

          The reason I&I broke down that sentence wasn’t because it was “bad” per se, but because it’s an example of how the LW is choosing less direct and concise ways of conveying information than her job needs. It is indirect. The same information could be conveyed directly with many fewer words–and that’s what her boss is asking her to do.

    11. Junior Assistant Peon*

      In my experience, learning how to write in the workplace has less to do with “plain English” and more to do with being concise. Brief bullet points that can be read quickly are the best way to communicate with a busy manager.

    12. Cthulhu's Librarian*

      Agreed.

      Academics are a fairly specific subtype of person, and generally the broader population regards the rhetorical flourishes that are common in that field as a sign someone doesn’t want to be understood.

      Why wouldn’t someone want to be understood? Usually it means they’re either trying to trick you, hide something, or exclude you.

      None of these are behaviors that make folks kindly disposed to you.

    13. Anon. Scientist*

      For support: I’m a scientist with an advanced degree and part of my job is writing/overseeing/reviewing very long technical reports. We are Relentless in excising passive voice (acknowledging that sometimes you need it) and getting rid of redundant information. The docs are not intrinsically interesting – don’t antagonize your audience with text that takes extra effort to decode.

      1. Falling Diphthong*

        There was a fascinating past discussion here on using the passive voice, and the two spots it was most prominent as a good choice were describing the steps of a science experiment, and doing root cause analysis for safety issues.

        1. JustMyImagination*

          I used it a lot when writing up audit reports. My job was to point out where people made mistakes or didn’t follow procedure. Passive voice gives just enough of a veil that I was never saying “you didn’t do this’ and immediately putting people on the defensive.

          1. Falling Diphthong*

            “The computer network had a single point weakness that could bring it all down” is more useful than “Binkley the new intern managed to crash the entire company-wide system while trying to find an online gardening game. Bad Binkley!”

      2. Observer*

        don’t antagonize your audience with text that takes extra effort to decode.

        Exactly this!

        I have a pretty solid reading comprehension. (I was reading at college level by the time I hit 8th grade, to be clear.) But when I’m tackling a difficult subject, if there are strong time constraints or I’m stressed in some way, I would very much rather spend my effort on the subject matter rather than on decoding. Yes, the effort may be minimal for me, but it’s still effort that I may not really be able to spare right now.

    14. RIP Pillowfort*

      As someone that deals with a lot of academics through research (and some that have transitioned to our state workforce), I hard agree with you. Knowing your audience is key here. I had to transition from writing for college to writing for the workplace which is full of diverse education levels and focused solely on communication and documentation of our work. They really would prefer it to be clear and concise. I could write a book about all the times I’ve had arguments with academics and ex-academics because they’re stuck in academic mode on their expert subject.

      Look I have to break down engineering terms for people because I know some of the people reading my work won’t be engineers or experts in the field. That isn’t an insult to my intelligence but me making sure my work is accessible.

      The only thing that gives me pause is the manager wanting to run the work through ChatGPT or other AI tools. That’s explicitly not allowed at my agency. We got a memo not too long ago outlining appropriate AI usage. But the overall recommendation to make your writing accessible can be done without it if you work on it.

      1. Falling Diphthong*

        If fiction is any guide, then Chap GPT is useful for criminals wanting to disguise their voice so distinctive turns of phrase don’t give away who’s sending the threatening emails.

    15. slippers*

      I knew the LW was coming from academia as soon as I read the headline. I do a fair amount of editing faculty/post doc writing so our stakeholders can understand it (and find it interesting). I’ve had to finesse my approach to assuring the author that the edited version doesn’t make the message less clear or accurate (and stand my ground when they insist on adding back 20 words and no commas to each sentence).

    16. DJ Abbott*

      Yes. Just yesterday I was looking at a bill that would affect our clients if it becomes law. I don’t have to know details but it would be nice, and I can’t spend a lot of time on such things. I looked at the actual law, put in the keyword I needed, and there were 600 instances of it. No one has time for that! Luckily, I was able to find a news summary that had the info I was looking for. Three short, clear paragraphs. :)

    17. MAC*

      I am a communications specialist for a federal contractor and there’s an actual Plain Language mandate from the agency we support. My team and those from five other contractors plus the main agency recently went through mandatory training. These are all people with decades of experience writing — for TV and print news channels, nonprofits, national laboratories, government, elected officials, etc. We all pride ourselves in our writing ability. And every single one of us learned something about how to communicate more effectively with our target audiences. In other words, nobody is so good that they can’t improve.

    18. JSPA*

      Some orgs have strict “readability” guidelines (8th grade, 6th grade).

      per this site, accessible public writing should be at eighth grade level or below.

      http://prsay.prsa.org/2021/11/12/what-readability-level-makes-sense-for-your-audience/

      I was praising to my spouse, yesterday, a city information sheet on lead in drinking water.

      It covered everything: current private lead lines; deposition of lead from prior municipal or private lead lines or fittings; lead solder; lead in mixed-metal fixtures; protective coating that forms on pipes when the water contains certain levels of minerals; how the effectiveness of flushing depends on the length of the pipe, with concrete examples, etc etc. As someone who’s been involved in the issue for several years– there was not a thing missing.

      In addition, the tone was informative serious, open and helpful. But not one word or sentence would have been out of place in a fourth grade reading book.

      It was absolutely a work of art.

      There is nothing dumbed down about writing copy at a certain reading level, Just as there’s nothing dumb about having english comprehension at that grade level.

    19. Lilo*

      I’m an attorney who deals with a wide variety of individuals (anyone from judges to the general public) and code switching and explaining legal concepts in plain language is a pretty significant part of my job. Tailoring writing to your audience is very normal.

    20. buddleia*

      Agreed. I’m a public servant in Canada, and writing in plain language is a thing. Academia asks you to write 5000-word essays, whereas in the public service you have to be brief. Tell the story and get to the point. A motto I heard years ago was “be brief, be bright, be gone.”

    21. Anonymous Tech Writer*

      I’ve read that the US Navy recommends an 8th grade reading level for its manuals: complex enough for complex equipment, but simple enough for people to “get it” on the first try even if English is not their first language(s).

      And then there’s the question of translation. At 25+ years writing manuals, I have seen that some English practices are brutal for translation.

    22. whatever*

      How DARE LW1’s manager try to dumb down their writing, doesn’t the manager know they used to work in academia! Sorry the governor is too stupid to understand!!

    23. possibly*

      LW1: I’d suggest you look at readability scores. I studied this in linguistics – you count the number of words in a sentence, and the number of syllables in words, and you try to make that number small.

      2. DJ Abbott*

        A good technique for business writing is, go over it and remove all unnecessary words. As concise and clear as possible.

    24. Love me, love my cat*

      This problem isn’t exclusive to academia. Years ago, I worked for an international company. There were procedures for how all support-level jobs should be done, written by staff in each of the many departments who had actually done the job. The company standardized procedures, using complex, technical terms, language and formatting. I spent an hour slogging through the revised procedure I was given, and damned if I could figure out how to do the job I’d been doing for 3 years.

    25. llamasandteapots*

      There are a lot of really helpful resources on plain language writing (which is literally what the government calls it): https://www.plainlanguage.gov/.

      If you stick with government work, I think you’re likely to keep running into this feedback, so digging into the topic further would definitely help.

    26. Anon Just for This*

      I have a PhD and now work in the government, so I have sympathy for LW1. It was a real adjustment when I started, because my writing style didn’t fit. And I was in social science and also had a writing style that was on the more accessible side. So the gap for me was smaller than it might be for others.

      As Testing mentioned, the goal is to make it as easy as possible for executives and politicians to grasp the key information, even if they do a 30-second speed read. I mean, one of our senior leaders really wants a one-sentence summary right below the title on our presentation slides so that she can get the point without having to read the whole slide. Because she sometimes doesn’t have time for more than that.

      Unfortunately, writing in the public service isn’t a creative exercise. The point is easily digestible facts. Your job is to make it as easy as possible for them to do theirs.

    27. DE*

      OP put “dumbing down” in quotes. That makes me think it was said in exactly that language. I wonder if the issue is that the audience in general can’t understand or just OP’s boss.

      1. Anon Just for This*

        Some politicians are very smart and will have some experience / education in specialized topics, but some won’t. That includes government representatives who lead a portfolio, unfortunately. Even in portfolios where it would really make sense to have someone with some kind of relevant credential, like health or education. It’s extra important to explain things for those people in ways that make it as easy as possible to grasp the most important things and to understand the implications.

      2. I&I*

        It sounds to me like the kind of phrasing someone uses when they’re trying to be tactful. What they mean is, ‘Be more readable, but I don’t want to insult you so I’m going to blame the reader rather than the writing.’

        1. anotherfan*

          I think the phrase “dumb it down” sounds like the OP and manager have had the polite conversation and the tactful discussion and it hasn’t made any difference and now the OP is on a PIP because they’re still dragging their feet and the manager is down to very terse words. This doesn’t appear to be as out-of-context as the OP describes. Just putting that out there.

      3. Observer*

        I wonder if the issue is that the audience in general can’t understand or just OP’s boss.

        Almost certainly not the boss. Even if that’s the exact phrase the boss used, it’s still a reasonable and *necessary* thing to do, even if she chose a poor way to express it.

        The LW is pushing back on using plain English. In the context of documents for which academic is objectively the wrong voice, since many of these documents have very specific requirements in how they are written. And in the context of possible legal requirements (note all the people talking about that – it’s real*).

        The LW says that they consider academic writing a “higher level” of writing, whatever that means. They say that they use a “collegiate” vocabulary, despite there being no evidence that that’s the audience they are addressing, and evidence that it’s NOT their audience. They push back on the notion that audience is a relevant factor to consider. And their own writing sample, ie a letter written to a popular work advice site, is way more formal and convoluted than is common. And that formality and complexity does nothing to really enhance our understanding of what the LW is trying to say.

        In fact, either the LW is saying that they are not aiming primarily for clarity and comprehension. Or this complexity is actually mis-representing what they are trying to say. So, no, I don’t think it’s their manager who is the problem here.

        Google “Plain English law US” and you will get a whole list of government sites, including information about the primary Federal law at play.

    28. Lenora Rose*

      I agree with this, and yet… I find there’s a second part that Alison doesn’t raise, in that I would find the suggestion to use ChatGPT INCREDIBLY offensive regardless.

      I used to have a bit of the academic writing quirk myself (my natural style was best described as “circumlocutory” and rephrasing things simply and briefly was something I had to do in edits) and I would not be offended to be asked to simplify things, even if they actually used the phrasing “dumb things down”, or said the large words were intimidating. I’d just do it.

      But I would be livid if they asked me to use the Plagiarism Machine to do it.

    29. Chickadee*

      Academic writing is rife with jargon, to the point scientists in other fields can barely read it. It’s such a common problem that there are multiple jargon checkers online. LW, set your pride aside and focus on clarity for your audience.

    30. HannahS*

      ARGH the internet ate my lengthy thoughtful comment…

      I think the OP is getting caught up in the “dumbing it down” comment, which was a poor choice of words from the boss. It’s not about smart or dumb. It’s about being appropriate to the context.

      I am proud of the medical notes I write. They distill complicated information into a relatively short note, and I work hard to make them easily readable to other busy doctors. They are nigh-incomprehensible to patients, because that’s not the audience they’re written for. Even if we set aside the issue of technical language, the information in the medical note is not necessarily what the patient wants or needs to know. I might include a treatment algorithm, but not an explanation of the illness, the cause, or the prognosis. The receiving provider went to medical school; they already know. But I might spend half-an-hour talking about those things with a patient, because that’s what’s most relevant to them, whether they’re “smart” or not.

      A busy politician doesn’t necessarily need a nuanced examination on a subject that considers the historical context; they need a one-pager with talking points.

      1. Anon Just for This*

        The structure of our notes to senior leadership and politicians (and I imagine we’re not unique). Put the key points at the top of the note, then explain how you got there below. Our last section (unless there’s appendices) is for background, including historical context. And that’s the case for even notes that are 2 pages or less. I’ve been in government for a while now and I still sometimes have to remind myself that I need to put the conclusion first in basically anything I’m writing.

        Bottom line, it’s likely that the person I’m writing for will only read like 10% of the thing I produced. Sometimes less! It’s a bit of a bummer, sure, but it’s also a reality of working in the public service, so I’ve got to accept it or choose another career path.

        1. Anon Just for This*

          Basically, the structure is “we recommend you do X, here’s why, and also there’s some additional background just in case you need it” rather than “historically, we’ve addressed stuff in this way, but these issues are coming up and there are many factors that go into the best decision, and as a result, we recommend you do X.”

      2. Nightengale*

        I write all my medical notes assuming the patient (or parent, I work with kids) is going to read them. They have legal access and a lot of families print out my reports to share with schools or other providers.

        Related statement: my medical notes take forever to write

        1. HannahS*

          I do too, in the sense that I don’t put anything in that I couldn’t explain to them, and I write in a neutral, nonjudgmental tone (boy have I seen some rude notes!) But I still don’t write mine with the patient as the intended audience.

    31. AnonInCanada*

      This. I’m not sure if OP has ever communicated formal correspondence to anyone other than those in academic circles, but the majority of people aren’t interested in pulling out the dictionary when they come across literature full of “five-dollar words,” as we called it back then.

      OP needs to understand the concept of knowing the audience. Hopefully they’ll not take this the wrong way, and work in making their documents clear and concise, which I figure is what what their boss is trying to convey.

    32. br_612*

      I’m a medical writer, mostly regulatory writing. All of my writing is going to the FDA (or in a few rare cases EMA), so it’s going to experts who expect a certain level of formality. I still often have to rework the language that I get from SMEs at clients because it’s too academic-style and assumes the reg reviewer is not just an expert in the general field, but an expert on their specific indication/drug. I have to coach them that no, the FDA reviewer will NOT be an expert on that level of niche detail and we will in fact have to handhold them through some things.

      Either way a layperson wouldn’t understand more than 20% of it. Hell even someone with a BS in a relevant field wouldn’t understand more than half. It’s too specialized. But even just between academic writing and regulatory writing there is a significant tone shift that not everyone can replicate. It’s why I’m paid the big girl bucks.

    33. Lemons*

      Yes! It sounds like they are asking for executive summaries. This is super super normal. Execs are typically really busy and pulled in a lot of directions, so they just need to get the main points as fast as possible…they have people like you to deal with the details, they often don’t need or want to know them. Consider it a writing challenge to see how concise you can be.

      As a person who’s dealt with a lot of both, my observations are that academics assume people will read things. They don’t! That’s why marketing writing is short and snappy, because many audiences will not read something long and thorough. This feedback is “you are not writing properly for the audience,” not “you’re a bad writer.”

    34. Escape from Corporate Management*

      OP1, you are wrong to be insulted. In your role, you write for your audience, not for yourself. I spent years in marketing for life sciences. We used one language standard for medical professionals and a far simpler standard for patients. You need to do the same for your agency.

    35. RedinSC*

      My office has specific rules around writing (local government). we’re required to use “Plain Language”

      Plain Language
      Overall goal: Write in a way that allows the public to “read, understand and use government communications.”
      • Information should be digestible
      • Information should empower the reader to use information effectively

      So, if LW’s writing isn’t hitting that plain language standard, ChatGPT is actually a solid way of getting it there.

      I know I’ve put in a medical summary (really not plain language) and asked to translate to plain language so I can understand it.

      LW, try it, write what you normally would, send it through whatever AI tool you’re offices are using and see if you can learn to adapt.

      One of my skills is that I am able to quickly learn the “voice” of the person I’m writing for (my boss, the head of the organization). So, learn the voice of your office and write that way. You got this!

      1. Lenora Rose*

        I’d rather use any other method than AI. There are a lot of ways to get there that don’t involve a machine of dubious ethics, and more to the point, most of the others aren’t much shorter in the immediate event, and will teach the OP much better in the long term.

    36. Beth*

      Agreed. OP1, I come from an academic background too. Now that I’m working outside the ivory tower, I’m constantly adjusting my writing to sound more like how I talk.

      Academic writing style prioritizes sounding ‘smart’: using collegiate vocabulary, long sentences with a complex structure of clauses, rich explanations of the research that led you to a conclusion, references to critical thinkers and fellow experts in your field whose work contributed to your thinking, etc. Sounding like an academic is important! It’s one way to show that you’re an expert in the academic world, and also gives you space to fully explain your thinking and approach. Making your work accessible to your reader, on the other hand, is low priority. Your target audience is highly motivated to read your work, either because they’re another academic who’s interested or because they’re a student who needs to learn the material for their grade; they’ll power through even if your work is challenging or time-consuming to read.

      In contrast, the goal for most professional writing is to be easy to consume. My readers aren’t stupid, but they are busy. If it takes more than a few minutes for them to read my writing, they won’t read it. So I make it easy:
      – Familiar vocab (~8th grade level)
      – Short sentences
      – Concise (focus on the main point, skip background info/explanation)

      The real marker of a smart writer is understanding what matters in different contexts and switching up your style to match that.

    37. fine-tipped pen aficionado*

      Yep! Please visit the federal government’s Plain Language website for guidance on what they need from you.

    38. Yorick*

      As an academic writer, I can say it definitely takes more skill to write simple and concise reports. “Dumb it down” isn’t a great way to look at it, because the problem isn’t that the writing is too “smart.”

    39. Pomodoro Sauce*

      I had the same problem as the LW when I went over to government, and I feel lucky that my supervisors worked to develop my writing for 1.) government accountability and 2.) a public audience. LW1’s supervisor isn’t wrong about needing to have a certain style — but her suggestions for workshopping are bad.

      If the supervisor won’t sit down with LW and edit the writing together, LW will have to seek out other senior employees for guidance or put a lot of thought into what the house style is.

    40. Kenna*

      Yes! I used to work in a gov correspondence office and it’s 100% about making things accessible for everyone. In terms of briefing notes – officials and the like are reading a huge volume of stuff all the time, so clarity and being concise is key! I get being frustrated with the AI component of this, but otherwise you should be swapping to plain language and I’d guess working on brevity as well. Very very standard for government writing!

    41. Momma Bear*

      I wouldn’t like the idea of using AI but if it’s gotten so far as to be on an improvement plan, there’s a major disconnect between OP and their boss’ expectations. Is it that the boss is confused or that someone else is confused? Are there specific examples of words OP can avoid in these documents? Are you familiar with plain language guidelines? https://www.plainlanguage.gov/guidelines/ – OP’s boss may be poorly communicating this.

      Academic writing is very different and I found I had to unlearn a lot of habits to work in a more technical field. More bullets. Shorter sentences. More pictures and graphs. Fewer words and less flowery ones. I often have 5 pages double spaced with 1″ margins and no smaller than 10 pt font in which to describe our solution. I keep the big words to a minimum out of necessity. If someone hands me their section and we’re half a page over, I’m going to cut back to shorter words. It’s not personal, nor is it insulting their intelligence. It’s just our business. Most of the time we are trying to just get the attention of the person gathering information and need to be as clear and concise as possible. The time to pull out the jargon is in the detailed technical brief.

      I feel your pain, OP, but I think you need to revisit the parameters of this work and adjust. Don’t look for the same kind of praise for your prose at this job. Find that in your academic work instead.

    42. Hats Are Great*

      I have to write highly technical briefings for lawyers, and then I have to rewrite the outcome of those into language at about a 6th-grade level for dissemination to line staff — AND for translation. “Clear, simple, and straightforward” is MUCH easier to translate accurately.

      I get that it can be really aggravating when you have a precise piece of jargon that’s useful to explain an entire concept in one word, but you really have to be able to pitch your writing to the audience and the business’s needs.

    43. Banana Pyjamas*

      Only around 50% of Americans read above a 7th grade reading level, so academic level writing is much too high for the average reader. If you can drop it to 4th grade level closer to 80% will be able to read your work.

      There’s around 90% comprehension for sentences under 15 words. Comprehension drops below 80% around 20 words.

    44. Sleeve McQueen*

      Agree. I have to give this feedback a lot in my work: the point is that nobody *has* to read the things we write, so we need to make it as easy as possible to read. You do that by minimising the mental energy the reader has to expend. If you have long wordy sentences, you can forget what happened at the start of the sentence by the time you get to the end.
      A professional, conversational tone, subheads and/or bullet points all improve your chances of success. I often tell people to structure sentences with all the relevant information in the first few words if possible, so readers can get the gist if they are skimming.
      If you don’t want to use ChatGPT, I recommend the Hemmingway App, which can help you edit your writing and give you a readability score. (Usual caveat about pasting proprietary information in the cloud etc etc).

  3. Viki*

    For 4, it depends if you have a work phone or not. My husband knows my access code for my work phone so he can easily get my manager’s contact info as needed.

    I also know my spouse’s office number (he doesn’t have an individual line).

    1. Testing*

      I’m guessing your husband knowing the access code to your work phone is totally against any IT policy your work place may have.

      1. MBK*

        Yeah, my IT folks wouldn’t be happy with a spouse or partner having any access to employer-owned devices, or any employer network connections or data on personal devices, even for emergency purposes. And I don’t even work in a particularly sensitive area.

      2. Viki*

        I’m well aware of the policies, and anything actually work related has a separate passcode.

        The contacts, such as my manager and direct report work numbers are not privacy locked. As my company lets us use work phones as personal as well, if we choose to, we’re golden.

        Point standing was, if you have a work device, that is, in an emergency an easy way to get your spouse access to your boss. There are obviously better channels, but if you’re comatose, alerting work while not high up there in priority, will probably be done by your family in the most direct way at the time.

      3. Antilles*

        It almost certainly is, but in a lot of industries (particularly those which aren’t security/regulation-heavy like banking or military security), it’s the kind of violation of the IT policy that you’re not going to actually get in trouble for.
        Why?
        Because presuming Viki’s husband doesn’t take advantage of it, the only way it comes into play (or they’d even know!) is if Viki is in emergency surgery or something else that requires the husband to use the phone. And if that happens, nobody is going to hassle you over it in light of the emergency.

    2. Nodramalama*

      You cannot imagine how large my eyes bugged out reading that. I trust you know your own works security policies, but this would be a real security breach at my work!

    3. allathian*

      If you put your manager as your work in case of emergency a.k.a. ICE contact (preface their name with ICE in caps), anyone should be able to call them using your work phone even when your phone is locked, like they would be able to call 911. Or at least it would work in the EU, how widespread is ICE in the US?

      Giving my husband access to my work phone would be a fireable offence.

    4. Workaholic*

      Op4: I lost my phone on my way to work earlier this year. The person who found my phone tried calling a few random contacts (no answer) then checked my Facebook and saw where I worked, so called the front desk. The front desk was able to contact me and pass the info on. They also would have been able to find my bosses because they have a company hierarchy available. (technically everyone has access because the info is available internally on Teams). So knowing where you work is probably enough, but providing your boss as a contact for “in case of emergency and I can’t call” should be fine.

        1. Seeking Second Childhood*

          Presumably she had been using it and dropped it. Doors close on thevtrain and BAM. If it was found promptly (or she was playing Candy Crush) it’s available.

          And my teenager wonders why I compulsively lock the screen…

      2. Jackalope*

        That really depends on the size of the employer. I’ve worked at places where that would be fine, and places where you wouldn’t have a chance of getting through to the right person unless you had at minimum their dept phone number.

      3. My own boss*

        Not phone related, but a story about how someone reconnected us with stuff by contacting my employer. My mom once left her purse in a restaurant while she was driving from Indiana to my house in Minnesota. Whoever found it googled her, found my name as a potential relative, then found my employer who then passed the message on to me. We both have fairly unique names and I was in a prominent role in a small organization. I also managed to return a wallet by finding someone through their work based on an insurance card with a similar name on it.

    5. JMC*

      I have it simplified in my case. My spouse has my manager’s cell phone number and can text her at any time that is necessary. I also know the code to my spouses cell phone and can contact their manager if need be. It’s necessary in this day and age, I feel a lot better knowing I don’t have to think about how to get ahold of someone like that when they already in a terrible situation with a medical emergency or what have you.

      1. JustaTech*

        About a year ago I gave my spouse my boss’ contact info (with boss’s permission) because I was going to be in a facility where I would not have direct access to any communication (clean room) so if there was an emergency at home the only way for my spouse to reach me would be for spouse to call boss, then boss to call the site, then someone at the site to call into the special room radio.

        I should give my spouse my new boss’ contact info, and get the same from my spouse (who’s boss’ full name I don’t know and he isn’t in this country), in case of emergencies. Right now the best I can do is try to get through to a coworker who is also a friend.

      2. Dorothy Lawyer*

        Yes! In our small office, we (3 people) have exchanged our spouses/adult children’s numbers for emergency purposes and shared each others’ numbers with our families.

    6. On Fire*

      WRT #4 — is it a common thing for someone to not know their spouse’s manager’s *full name*? That’s a completely foreign concept to me. :-) When I traveled a lot for work, my spouse had contact info for both my manager and the person with whom I frequently traveled. Now that I’m in the office almost full-time, he still has a way to reach my manager or one of my close work friends. I assumed that was the norm.

      1. Doreen*

        I’m sure my husband never knew my manager’s full name but he still would have been able to get them on the phone, because my employer still had landlines and someone would have answered my phone and been able to transfer him.

      2. Breakfast Fiend*

        Completely agree…I’m not even married yet but my partner and I still know each other’s managers’ names and could easily contact them by just looking them up in each other’s phones if needed. We don’t have work phones, just personal, and we know each other’s passcodes. Seems like a matter of practicality to me.

      3. Goody*

        Not only does my spouse not know the full name of any of my coworkers, I have a strong suspicion that he doesn’t even know their first names aside from my direct supervisor. And the reverse is true, I don’t know the names of anyone he works with. This is largely because of our opposing schedules and the fact that we dont generally mention work in the very small sliver of time we have together. We both know where the other works and could manage to get in touch with someone relevant if needed. And honestly, I didn’t think it was abnormal until this letter.

      4. Festively Dressed Earl*

        It’s not uncommon. How often do people use last names when talking to their spouse about work? My husband is a government contractor working remotely with/for other government contractors, and his direct supervisor changes fairly frequently. I’ve never met his current coworkers. Calling the government office he works for would be useless. Because of this, I ask him every few months who I should call if he’s incapacitated. That means (1) someone who’s in his personal cell who either (2) is his supervisor or (3) can quickly get in touch with his supervisor.

    7. Pomodoro Sauce*

      I send my husband an email titled “Pomodoro’s Emergency Work Contacts” and then put 2-3 ways to contact my job in there — email and phone for my boss, email and phone for my HR, sometimes contact information for a senior coworker or a grandboss, the link to the company webpage — then if I am incapacitated he has that information ready to go.

      Honestly I think we both need to update ours, as we’ve gotten new supervisors in the last few months.

      1. I take tea*

        This is a really good idea, I’ll copy that and ask my partner to do so as well.

        I certainly don’t know my partner’s coworkers last names and vice versa, except for the one person we see socially. My partner would contact them, I would call the general number and ask for the head of that department.

  4. Taskmistress*

    LW1 – my work offers a course called Simplify Language (it’s from an outside vendor) and it was so helpful in reframing my thoughts about writing! instead of writing to show off my knowledge, I’m writing to communicate to the broadest audience possible. and doing this isn’t “dumbing” it down, it’s ensuring access for people with learning disabilities, or speak English as a second language, or who are just busy and need me to get to the point.

    1. Coverage Associate*

      I have a book on my TBR list titled “Simply Said,” by Jay Sullivan, if OP wants a resource similar to the resources OP has been working with. It’s available as an ebook from my local public library.

      1. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

        Not the OP but thank you for the book recommendation. I’ve checked my local library and they have a copy :)

    2. Certaintroublemaker*

      I’ve taken similar courses from Wylie Communications. I also have Smart Brevity on hold at the library and am looking forward to it.

    3. Alicent*

      I remember when I finished grad school and my supervisor who spoke English as a second language had to ask me to stop using “five dollar words” as it was causing miscommunications between us. I didn’t seeing it as “dumbing it down,” but instead making my communication available to a wider audience which was the whole point.

    4. Cadillac*

      I was going to say something very similar. I manage technical writers and my husband is a former academic.

      The job of academic writing is to convey highly complex ideas, extremely precisely.

      The job of most business writing is to make information as fast and easy to digest as possible.

      LW I hope that thinking of it that way might help you to see your manager’s feedback in a different light!

      1. Trillian*

        I fully get OPs frustration. I’m on the science side and suffered it myself when I had to shift modes and it felt like going from precise to imprecise when I could not use the terminology that belonged. Writing patient consent forms for clinical trials is unnerving, because they have to go down to less than eighth grade reading level, and there’s so much you cannot convey in that language in the space allowed. One of my later bosses spent four years teaching me to translate my reports from Middle Academic to High Administrator, to make my documents useful to the policy makers that I was writing for–I was constantly fretting that I was going to leave out or change the meaning of something vital that they *needed to know*. But he was a high administrator himself, and I had to trust his feedback. Now I find myself trying to pass on his teachings when I review documents.

        But you are writing to communicate to an audience, and have to do the best you can to get to where they are. That, too, is a skill to build and appreciate.

        1. Guacamole Bob*

          I manage junior data analysts, and the amount of information that feels vital to a technical person that is extraneous to a senior decision-maker can be vast. It’s so hard at first to exclude the caveats, context, and explanations and just provide the necessary info that the audience needs.

          I often frame it as some variation on “if the senior person you’re telling this to runs into a board member at the grocery store, what do you want him to say about what we found?” That’s the top-line message that you want to put in your slide or email.

          1. el l*

            As a manager of data analysts too, I’m going to steal your first sentence:

            “The amount of information that feels vital to a technical person that is extraneous to a senior decision-maker can be vast.”

      2. Guacamole Bob*

        One big switch isn’t even about language, it’s about how you structure your writing.

        In academic writing you tend to build an argument, laying out the context, the reason for the research, your methods, and only really get to the findings and conclusions near the end, taking the reader along with you through a whole process. Full paragraphs are the norm.

        If you’re briefing busy executives, elected officials, etc., then a more BLUF (bottom line up front) approach is often appropriate, often structured in bullet points, with supporting information provided below/attached or if asked for. Simpler language is preferred, and you do often lose some precision, but you’re conveying what someone needs to know in order to act on the information.

        Academic style would be “we studied whether head-to-tail or tail-to-head llama grooming approaches are more efficient, with trials over three months on our herd of 20 llamas of varying sizes and ages. We found a 14% efficiency gain from the tail-to-head approach, with a standard deviation of 6%, unless the groomer is under 5’3″ tall in which case the head-to-tail approach results in a 10% faster groom. We theorize that llamas lose patience with bending their heads down for ear grooming if it comes at the end of the process, but further study is needed to investigate how llama temperament affects these results.”

        A business or government leader probably needs something more like “We’ve found that a tail-to-head grooming process is more efficient except with shorter groomers; The switch should save our agency about $750k this year. We’ll come back to you with formal recommendations for shorter groomers next month (such as buying stepladders or adjusting the SOP based on height).

    5. Smithy*

      Yes – I will give the OP a little grace with hearing the phrase “dumbing down” as not always being the most helpful instruction to give when someone does come from a more academic or technical background.

      I’m in a generalist role and regularly work with experts in trying to get them to communicate their work to other generalists or even experts, but in a different field. Admittedly, when I’ve run out of examples and metaphors it can be easy to resort to phrases like “dumbing down” or “so a sixth grader could understand”. I’ve learned that when I do this, it’s more indicative of my frustration and rarely works in truly communicating what I want. If this was the supervisor writing, I’d recommend focusing on how the OP should WANT their most senior leaders (i.e. the governor) or a larger team of generalist fundraisers to be able to represent their work at higher levels or externally. And part of doing that, is putting it into language that works for them and matches their speech approach.

      All to say – to anyone in this moment, first you have my sympathies. Someone resistant to this feedback is difficult to get through to. But I do think that phrases like dumbing down don’t help us as much as we think they could.

        1. Smithy*

          When direct phrases haven’t been successful – I have had more luck with metaphors such as explaining certain audiences we have being a case of a professional race car driver behind the wheel of a golf cart. Sometimes you’re talking to the race car driver, sometimes you’re talking to the golf cart and you don’t always know which. So, we’re looking for ways to reach both.

          Overall I agree with AAM and most commentors about the OP being in the wrong. But for those of us trying to get people to simplify their writing style, I’ve just learned the phrase dumbing down just isn’t effective. Think of it like any kind of slang that’s not exactly rude or profane but puts people on the back foot.

      2. el l*

        Yes, while OP really needs to adjust their style, soapbox: I hate describing it as “dumbing down.”

        Because it implies it’s less.

        When in fact it’s the acme of skill to render complex concepts in eighth grade language. And all while minding your tone, and focusing on the point you need them to take away – neither of which is a big problem in academic writing but which is crucial almost everywhere else.

        1. Smithy*

          Exactly – it serves to really diminish the work and skill on presenting complex concepts and projects to large audiences. And by diminishing that it is work and skill, for people where it’s not an easy task – during those struggles, it can make someone avoid admitting it’s a skill they don’t currently have and therefore it will take longer to get there.

          Because right now the dynamic between the OP and their supervisor is the supervisor asking for something and the OP fighting against it as being a wrong or irrelevant ask. Alternatively, this dynamic could be that the OP is struggling on a new skill set, and the supervisor could be directing the OP to classes or other experts that can help them grow that skill.

    6. Plain Language Evangelist*

      As someone who’s been an editor at a policy nonprofit, one of my favorite things I learned was about the science of reading and the use of plain language in that context. While it is important to reach a broad audience, part of it is that even if someone CAN understand your writing, the more complex it is, the less likely they are to retain that information. So when you’re writing about presumably important topics for very busy people like politicians, the simpler you can make the language, the more likely they are to retain and act on the information.

    7. JustaTech*

      My company had a similar course many years ago and not only was it helpful for my writing (shifting from academic to technical-for-industry) but it *finally* got through to my coworker who had just finished his PhD and *could not* turn off “dissertation voice”. Trying to read his reports was a nightmare and he was incredibly touchy about being edited for clarity or brevity.

      It took an outside expert re-doing his material in front of a group to finally get through that he was not communicating well. (I still hate having to go through his old reports because you have to dig so hard to find the relevant data.)

    8. Hydrangea MacDuff*

      OP, maybe it would help you to think of it as “code-switching” rather than “dumbing down.”

      I worke in public education communication and I often joke that my job is “translating Education to English.” Audience comes first, and readability is important for every single thing we do. You don’t want the person evaluating your grant to glaze over; you don’t want your community to think you are a bunch of bureaucrats using 10 dollar words – you want to get those grants and inform your community!

      I have a colleague who is an immensely talented writer and academic with multiple degrees. He often jokes he should get paid by the word and I should get paid by the word of his that I take out when I edit his documents. We both agree that we are a good team and that we are serving our audience by the work we do together.

      When I find myself falling back on my worst (and by worst I mean wordiest) tendencies, I ask myself: how would I put this on Twitter? and that’s usually my starting sentence.

  5. Eric*

    #2, another framing on the laundry front that might be less awkward and also the problem: front load washing machines need to be cleaned on occasion, otherwise they cause clothes to smell.

    1. Emmy Noether*

      Front loading washing machines mostly just need to be kept wide open sufficiently long after a cycle to dry out completely, then they don’t develop smell problems. (I think toploaders don’t have fully watertight doors, which is why it’s not so important for them. Frontloaders obviously need to be watertight, and hence, hold moisture). Most people I know just leave theirs open permanently when not in use.

      1. JMC*

        I have a top loader and leave it open when not in use. It eliminates the smell and it shows whether it’s in use or not.

        1. Lenora Rose*

          I have a top loader and I used to do this more often, but mostly don’t anymore… three instances of having to trap and release the spider at the bottom before I put the clothes in was enough. I never had that issue (that I know of) with a front loader; my guess is they can more easily get out when they realise it’s a prey-free zone.

        2. Edwina*

          I do this with my top loader, too, just in case it helps the washer to stay odor free. I have been having a hell of a time with stuff smelling musty/really gross after being put away. I started using the little beads that you put in the wash to make things smell flowery, but it only help with some things.

          The turning point was when my housemate said she thought I wasn’t drying everything enough, and I wasn’t! I didn’t want things to shrink. But as soon as I started drying everything longer and on a slightly higher temperature, they stopped stinking. What a relief! I still have stink issues with a couple of large blankets, so next time I wash them, I’m going to hang them over the stair banister for a few days so it’s absolutely dry before folding it up and putting it away. Fingers crossed.

          1. Edwina*

            Also want to add that, in my experience, natural deodorants don’t work. So that might be part of the problem with the OP’s relative…?

            I borrowed a shirt after unexpectedly staying over with a friend, and I had to go out and buy a new shirt at lunch because it started to really smell after I had it on for a couple of hours. And she used the natural deodorant. I had tried them in the distant past and didn’t realize that they weren’t working for me when a friend told me. I couldn’t tell, so it’s possible the OP’s relative really doesn’t realize how bad the smell is.

      2. Seeking Second Childhood*

        There are latches to keep front-loaders partially open while still keeping out toddlers and cats.

      3. Hillary*

        I recently found out about magnetic washing machine door props – I’m ridiculously happy about it. No more door swinging loose. Not going to link but if you search there are a ton of options.

    2. Gamer Girl*

      Yes! I’ve helped teens living on their own for the first time with this in the past, and I’ve found that there are lots of quick maintenance tips most people don’t know. My mom is a laundry nut (truly-she will watch friends’ machines and diagnose the machine’s problems, as well as maintaining her own), and my dad is a plumber, so I have an unusual amount of knowledge about this topic. I wrote it down in case someone is in a similar bind or is dealing with a washing machine in a rented place:

      The six main culprits are to:

      1. Keep the door open. Non negotiable!

      2. remove the detergent tray if you can easily do it and leave it on top of the machine when you’re done washing. Some hold water and can make the machine stink/mold

      3. Wipe down the door, inside of the washer, and rubber gasket every time you use the machine. Takes 5 seconds, and it’s just water and some fibers if you do it every time instead of gross sludge and slime in the gasket.

      It’s a good measure of whether you are using too much soap, too. If there’s a film of soap after you wash a load, it was too much soap/water not hot enough to break it down/both.

      4. Run at least one cycle per week on hot/60C+ to ensure you aren’t growing anything in the machine or pipes. For me, that’s my towels wash.

      5. Reduce your detergent usage–unless your clothes are getting actual dirt/heavy amounts of sweat, half is usually plenty. And, check that the detergent is appropriate for the machine (HE and front loaders need a lot less!)

      Any athletic wear doesn’t need much at all–it’s made mostly out of plastic. If you have funky athleisure, look into a special detergent for it–they have ones now that are special formulated for cold water washing. Besides wool wash for sweaters, it’s the only special detergent I use.

      6. Don’t use fabric softener. It’s basically scented clothing wax! It really gunks up the machine over time and makes towels unusable and even greasy. Use a touch of plain vinegar in the softener drawer instead (a tablespoon for a full load) if you’re washing something that needs de-funking.

      To clean a machine:
      -wipe out the rubber gasket, wipe down the door and inside the drum (no cleaning products, just a rag or old sock will do).
      Remove and fully clean the detergent tray in very hot water and clean the inside of the machine where the tray is inserted–remember to look at all sides, including the top! If the tray is full of detergent scum, you are probably using too much detergent or need to check your manual–you might be putting it in the wrong drawer/wrong setting!

      Find the filter (usually near the base in the front), put a towel on the floor and have a rag at the ready. There might be something gross in there or something blocking the filter. Empty it, clean the plug and where the plug is inserted in the machine.

      Then, run the machine on empty on the very hottest setting you can. When finished, wipe down the door with a clean cloth, followed by the inside, followed by the gasket.

      If you can find a machine cleaning solution, I would then use that as instructed for a second cleaning cycle, now that any gunk or crud has been removed with the first cycle. (+check the instructions, some need a final rinse cycle after the wash cycle, some don’t.)

      If you maintain the machine well, you usually only have to do the whole empty machine and filter clean once every 1-3 months to maintain the machine perfectly. Takes about 15 mins total + washing cycle time to do if you are wiping out the machine every time you use it and removing the drawer (30 seconds of work). I set a reminder on my phone to do this, along with cleaning my dishwasher filter and racks.

      If there’s still a lingering stink in the machine after cleaning, it is worth getting a drain snake (they are about 10 bucks) and checking the drainage pipe, especially if you are renting or have hairy pets! Otherwise, run a couple more sanitize cycles.

      If all else fails, you may need someone to come dismantle the machine and clean the drum/replace something (especially if you were using lots of fabric softener–look up fabric softener washing machine repair videos on YouTube…)

      1. Gamer Girl*

        To clarify: my mom always says that washing machines in a rented place are the worst best mystery–she never knows what people put in them before and how they were maintained, so they are her favorite to de-gunk!

        1. Falling Diphthong*

          I recall moving into an apartment and concluding the dryer must not have a lint filter, since we couldn’t find it. Four attempts to dry a load of laundry later, we really took things apart and discovered the lint filter at the back of the machine. Containing enough lint that it was clear the previous tenant had just gone with running the dryer load a fifth time.

          Thanks for this clear layout.

      3. Earlk*

        No disrespect to anyone who has the time to do all of the above but I find running bleach through through it every couple of weeks on a hot wash and wiping down the rubber seals also enough for keeping it from smelling.

        Definitely seconding not using fabric softner though.

        1. Resident Catholicville, U.S.A.*

          Yeah, we’ve had a front loader for 20 years and all I do is make my last load my whites, so they get bleached, and leave the door open after the last cycle. Since I do the laundry once a week, it’s getting bleached at least that often. The washing machine pitches a fit if I don’t do a cleaning cycle every once and awhile, so when I do that, I throw some bleach in there too (maybe even some Arm & Hammer for good measure, if I’m feeling spicy).

          Even though I get nose blind to my perfumes, I definitely DO NOT get nose blind to even the most minute changes to the smell of my clean clothes so I’m pretty confident our clothes don’t smell. That said, don’t get me started on Unstoppables. When I went to the laundromat and someone had used the those in the washing machine before me, boy howdy, I’d be mad- those things a super stinky.

        2. Gray Lady*

          I think some of this might have to do with where you live. I’ve never done any of this (beyond regularly doing hot/bleach loads) and I’ve never had a problem at all. But it’s not very humid where I live, except in summer, but the A/C seems to deal with it well enough to prevent issues.

      5. Lab Snep*

        Also this, because I witnessed it at a laundromat:

        Do not put your clean clothes in a laundry bag that smells STRONGLY like BO. So strongly that someone else in the laundromat can smell it 5 machines away.

        If you use a cloth laundry bag, launder it with your laundry.

        1. Selina Luna*

          Huh. I use a cloth laundry bag for my baby’s clothes because I use cloth diapers, and a cloth laundry bag allows us to wash the bag with the baby’s clothes and diapers. I guess I should have been laundering the mesh laundry bag I used in college, too. Oh well.

          1. Lab Snep*

            I didn’t do this for a while and was wondering why my clothes were smelling stale.

            I washed the bag and was like “Oh.”

      6. Former teacher, forever educator*

        I have been a laundromat user for most of my adult life, but now have an in-home laundry. This is so helpful! Thank you!

      8. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

        Copied and saved to a word document :)

        Seriously, I’ve had a washing machine for decades (pretty much all washing machines in the UK are front loading) and learnt something new here. Now off to persuade the husband unit to stop using fabric softener.

      9. Jackalope*

        Okay, question about this. You mentioned a rubber gasket multiple times, but which part is it and where would I find it?

        1. Great Frogs of Literature*

          In a front-load machine:

          – Open the door. (Hopefully it was already open, because you leave your washing machine open.)
          – Around the edge of the opening, there’s a flexible rubber piece, probably gray. That’s the gasket.
          – Wipe down all the visible bits with a cloth, and scrub a little if it’s coated with hair or gunk.
          – Gently fold back parts of the gasket that move when you pull on them, and wipe them out, too. Be careful with this bit — if you move it too vigorously, you can dislodge a wire piece that holds it in place, and it’s nearly impossible to put back without a specialized tool.

      10. iglwif*

        Wow, I had no idea people actually still washed clothes in hot water! TIL.

        I’ve been using the same front-loading washer for 15 years, and I do all those other things (door open whenever the machine is empty, leaving the detergent tray pulled out, wiping the rubber gasket, never using fabric softener or dryer sheets, using much less detergent than with a top loader) but I’ve never used hot water. The machine remains perfectly fine.

        But do you know any tricks for rejuvenating a dryer that is also 15 years old, is de-linted very regularly, and only sometimes deigns to use heat?

        1. stuck in Excel*

          We had to have a guy come out and replace the thermostat I think?

          It was about 13 years old at that time but it’s still going strong now at 15 years.

          Never using softener is huge for how well our washer and dryer still run at 15 years of age.

          1. iglwif*

            Oh interesting! I don’t even know who to call anymore lol but I will do some research. We did have a guy come and replace the rubber gasket on the washing machine maybe 5 years ago but the machines were still under warranty then so it was a guy from the manufacturer.

            I quite simply do not understand fabric softener — like, I’m *delighted* that it is probably increasing the longevity of expensive machines we can’t easily afford to replace, but mainly I don’t use it because as far as I can tell the only thing it does is cause everything it touches to STINK HORRIBLY FOREVER.

        3. JustaTech*

          I use the “sanitize” cycle to wash the cloths we use to dry after the bidet – just to be really sure they’re clean.
          I also used it for the baby’s clothes when he was tiny and just fluids everywhere (sorry for that image).

          Everything else gets washed on “normal” or “cool”.

          1. iglwif*

            Oh yeah good point about babies and bodily fluids. When I had a baby, we lived in a rented flat with laundry in the basement, and the cloth diapers were washed by a diaper service that I am 100% sure used extremely hot water and probably also bleach, which I would not use in my house except maybe as a nuclear option against mildew. So I hadn’t thought of poopy diapers in the washing machine.

            I’ve never heard of a “sanitize” cycle on a washing machine, but mine is, as noted, 15 years old and apartment-sized, so that’s either a more recent invention or something you get in larger and pricier machines ;)

            1. JustaTech*

              Yup, this is a pretty big machine that’s about 5 years old. I only use that cycle about once a week, and I do think it helps cut down on how often the machine asks me to run the self clean cycle (which is 4 hours long and often results in a little bit of water leakage).
              But I would never run adult clothing through it for fear of shrinkage.

    3. learnedthehardway*

      For our front-load washer, we always put 1 cup of vinegar in with every load. It’s the only way to prevent things from smelling musty. We also run cleaning pucks, but they don’t do much. I ended up ordering the chemicals that the pucks are made of, and ran a whole lot of that through – it made some difference, but we still need to use vinegar. I think the whole machine would have to be taken apart and scrubbed on a regular basis to prevent mildew. It’s maddening.

      1. Zahra*

        My aunt’s front-loader didn’t wash very well after a while. I had to some laundry at her place (my washer wasn’t big enough) so I checked her gasket. There was so much stuff in the drainage holes of her gasket that I used tweezers to remove a bunch of gunk! Then I ran a few washes on extra-hot water to clear everything up. It was back to normal, but I should check it out when I go see her during the holidays, make sure she’s doing a hot water wash every once in a while and keeping her washer door open.

    4. Meow*

      Also, maybe I’ve just gotten stinkier, but I swear laundry detergent has gotten less effective the last couple years. I’ve had to start using odor reducing detergent just for my every day clothes because regular detergent wasn’t getting out any of the armpit odor.

      1. Zahra*

        I had the same issue a few years back! My solution was to do multiple soaks in baking soda and/or vinegar until the buildup of sweat was gone, then using baking soda in pre-wash soak and/or vinegar as fabric softener pretty religiously.

      2. Ann Nonymous*

        Spray the pits with the cheapest vodka you can find before you put the clothes in the hamper. You can also use it on clothing to refresh it or if you don’t want to wash it (or it can’t be washed) before the next use.

  6. kindheartedskeptic*

    I love floral language; I write for an academic audience, and yes, OP1, you need to pull it back. Even your letter to Alison was more formal than I would recommend using.
    If you write for a state-wide audience, then you are writing for an international and diverse audience, and this means plain language is more accessible, period. It’s easier to translate, it’s more easily comprehended by people for whom English isn’t their first language, and it’s more accessible for neurodiverse people – dyslexia and ADHD are the first conditions that come to mind.

    Good writing means moderating your words for your audience. There’s definitely a time and place for academic tones, but this isn’t it. And, I’d argue that using plain language will make you a better writer in the end. Using plain language means skillful care with words, not stupidity and intimidation.

    1. Observer*

      And, I’d argue that using plain language will make you a better writer in the end. Using plain language means skillful care with words, not stupidity and intimidation.

      LW, this is true. And it’s a perfect example of the genre. It’s clear, concise and communicates a specific idea. And it does so without dumbing anything down.

      Your goal is NOT to be “far from inaccessible” in the role you describe. Your goal is to be clear, understandable, accessible (which is more that “not inaccessible”), and appropriate to the audience (not an imaginary “audience”) and purpose of the work.

    2. Azalea Bertrand*

      Agree with this. I work in govt (different country) and I also found the style in the letter a bit much, a bit overblown. It’s not that I didn’t understand it, just that there are faster and simpler ways to convey the same information.

      It’s REALLY important to understand that when writing briefs/memos/other for politicians you need to make it so simple that it can be skimmed while they’re doing 20 other things and still get the gist. If they have to concentrate on your brief it’s going to be rejected – that’s why your boss cares and why your boss has flagged it for improvement.

    3. InsufferablePedant*

      Did you mean *florid* language? ;)

      (I couldn’t let that pass in a post about writing, sorry!)

      1. Azalea Bertrand*

        I read ‘floral’ as intentional, my head went to ‘flowery prose’. But you’ve reminded me that florid is a most excellent word and I intend to reuse it at the earliest opportunity.

    4. Gamer Girl*

      Agreed, especially on the last point. Study a copy of Strunk and White if you don’t know where to start, OP. It’s a small book and will help you reword and simplify, especially if you are wary of AI solutions!

      1. epicdemiologist*

        Came here to say “read Strunk & White” (The Elements of Style). Strunk was an academic; White was a journalist, editor and author, and one of the best prose stylists of his generation.

    5. Justin*

      I would argue that my ADHD diagnosis and the fact that I get bored so easily helps me, as an academic, write more clearly because I imagine myself reading and getting bored.

      1. Queen esmeralda*

        Same! I had a job where I had to rewrite our procedure manual because the current version stunk. Boss couldn’t believe that I was able to make it more unnderstandable and about half as long.

    6. Polly Hedron*

      I agree with your general point, but can you explain what in OP1’s “letter to Alison was more formal than [you] would recommend using”?

      1. Dark Macadamia*

        For me it’s “while I maintain a ‘collegiate vocabulary,’ I am far from inaccessible.” That’s a bit much for an advice column letter about not needing to simplify their writing style. Very Moira Rose “I’ll disabuse them of any notion we’re too patrician.”

        It also reminds me of the XKCD about someone being misunderstood online and the response is like “ah yes, you’re great at communication, which famously only involves one person.” If the purpose of your writing is to communicate and you’re getting feedback that it’s not working, you’re not a good writer (in that context, for that purpose).

        1. duinath*

          The whole letter reads weirdly formal to me.

          Sometimes individual words stand out, but it is mostly the way it *feels* like there are five words anywhere one would do. Same with syllables, and most of the individual words that pop out at me are ones I don’t see often because a synonym is more common.

          It lends a slightly off putting air to the whole letter, imho. It’s hard to put my finger on it exactly! I wish I had more tangible notes.

          (I’m sure they’re a lovely person.)

    7. Rocking_IT_Today*

      I do a ton of writing for the masses and was told to aim for about 9th grade reading ability. It has worked out well for me and many people have said they appreciated the ease of reading some pretty technical IT stuff.

    8. fhqwhgads*

      The style guide for at least two places I’ve worked called for all external communications (intended for adults) to be at no higher than an eighth grade reading level. That’s the rule of thumb for “accessible”. Just to give OP1 a measurable target.

  7. Elbie*

    I had a new hire last year, shortly after I learned I was pregnant. We are a very small dept, so I wanted to ensure that we truly considered the strengths of the candidates, knowing that they would be covering a lot while I was gone. However, I was not at the stage where I was even telling a lot of my friends or family at the point that we were hiring and it was still close to 7 months away. I told my boss when I was only 8 weeks pregnant, as I thought it would be important to consider my 6 month maternity leave during our hiring process, but I did not inform the candidates as it just felt too early. About 2 weeks after our hire started, I let him know that I would be going out on leave in about 5.5 months, apologized that I did not disclose it during the hiring process (as I had recently found out prior to beginning the interviews), and outlined the transition plan. Thankfully he rolled with it! But I felt really bad about not disclosing earlier in the process.

    1. KateM*

      You were apologizing for going to maternity leave in half a year and not disclosing it beforehand? That sounds like an overkill to me. In half a year, many things could happen!

    2. the cat's pajamas*

      That kind of situation makes sense, but please tell candidates if/when possible. This happened to me and it was really awkward to start a new job without knowing what my new boss was really like for several months. I also ended up in an awful situation with another manager in an adjacent team we had to work with frequently. There was nobody there to back me up as a new person or tell me what was reasonable to expect from that team.
      My boss did an excellent job getting coverage, but it took a lot longer to really feel settled and it affected establishing my credibility. It was a stretch role for me, too.

    3. ferrina*

      You’re fine. The new hire had almost 6 months to onboard before you needed to go on leave- that’s reasonable. Not ideal, but very reasonable. I think as a rule of thumb, once you are ready to tell the boss, you need to tell the new hire.

      For example, I had one job where the boss that hired me went on parental leave within a month of my start date. And that boss didn’t set up an onboarding for me before leaving. That was a disaster.

    4. lyonite*

      Knowing during the hiring process is good, but what would really matter to me is to know that there was a plan. Not the same thing, but at a previous job, about a week after I started, my direct manager had a sports injury that took him out for several weeks, at the same time as my grandboss was on vacation and my more senior colleague was on maternity leave. So there was no plan at all, and I ended up starting that job completely adrift.

  8. Double A*

    For the teacher, ignoring you and watching YouTube also weren’t that student’s accommodations. She wasn’t using her accommodation, which was taking breaks to prevent escalation. That said, she was clearly smart enough not to have to pay attention in the traditional way, so she may have been doing what she could to self regulate and it sounds like academically she was fine. It’s unfortunate that she was rude to you in the process; it sounds like the setting difficult for her cope with.

    I’ve worked with kids with social/emotional and mental health issues off and on as a Special Ed teacher for 15 years and honestly for a lot of mental health issues, there aren’t any accommodations that will make traditional school work great for a kid. The environment is simply incompatible with their needs. The size of many schools is a fundamental problem for a lot of kids and you can’t really accommodate that away.

    There is also a lot more variety in work places so people may have a better shot at finding a workplace that fits with their mental and physical needs. Of course they have a better chance of finding that workplace if the get a good education.

    1. Ellis Bell*

      Yeah, I have definitely had similar thoughts about difficult students; how on earth will they survive in the workplace!! But it’s a great mistake to equate the artificial environment of a traditional classroom with the great variety of workplaces out there. More importantly for someone with ODD traits, there will be fewer orders and more choice; they can go to the toilet when they please, flex their hours, book a day off when things are getting exhausting. I don’t know if OP would agree with me, but it doesn’t sound like either they or their student was particularly well supported with this student and that the kid was abandoned with an “accommodation” no one in the school’s wider structure could reasonably meet. I would be expecting much more check ins, and discussion from leaders and the district about whether the accommodation was working and whether the school environment was suitable for them.

      1. Dahlia*

        I will also point out that the goal of school should not be to create workers. There’s this weird idea some people seem to have that because an accomodation might not be feasible in a workplace, it isn’t something a kid should get. Some kids will never have a traditional job or maybe any job at all, and that’s okay.

      2. ferrina*

        great mistake to equate the artificial environment of a traditional classroom with the great variety of workplaces out there

        +100 to this. And jobs are a choice, whereas school is not.
        I have ADHD and cPTSD, and as a teenager I had no patience with boring things that wasted my time. I played cards throughout half of my high school classes. I got mediocre grades because I constantly forgot/didn’t want to do homework that was just busy work, but I could ace any test and I would thrive on the most difficult assignments.

        I never had those issues at work. I was staunchly professional. I would enthusiastically tackle any assignment, no matter how boring. The difference was in choice. School just an involuntary waste of my time; at work, I had committed to the job and I was being compensated. It was a totally different situation.

      3. CeeDoo*

        My sister jokes that I have ODD (I’m 48), and I’ve been steadily employed since I was 16 and I’ve never had any kind of accommodations. I hate being told what to do, but I tend to just grumble about it to myself now and not be a jerk. I don’t get told what to do often, because I have 23 years of teaching experience. There are few mandates placed on me (I’m math, but not a state tested subject), and the ones that I receive, my only reactions are to suck it up and do it, procrastinate and then do it, or out-and-out refuse to do it and wait to see if I get caught. (I only do that with mild stuff, like a “mandatory” school wide meeting after school. No one will notice I’m not there among the 300 staff members.)

    2. Azalea Bertrand*

      It’s also interesting to note that for some people with ODD or PDA (both controversial, both often misdiagnosed), becoming an adult can be so freeing. Because you’re primarily making your own decisions you have more bandwidth to accept direction at the times you *have* to, eg when your boss tells you to do something. Individual results vary of course.

      1. Irish Teacher.*

        Yes, I was thinking that the arguments you sometimes hear in education that “we’re not preparing them for the workforce if we accommodate x; they won’t get so many accommodations there,” isn’t always that simple.

        For one thing, school isn’t primarily about preparation for work (not saying the LW thinks it is, just that wider society sometimes seems to). And for another, it’s not like denying them accommodations and letting them fail in school prepares them either. The arguments I sometimes hear seem to assume that people with accommodations don’t really NEED them and would adapt to normal guidelines if they were removed (again, I do not believe the LW thinks this, just talking about the wider debate) wen those of us who grew up in eras before those accommodations were available know that is not the case, that those students often simply dropped out of school early and ended up with no qualifications as well needing accommodations in the workplace.

        Also, people and situations change. The school environment is quite narrow. It doesn’t suit everybody. People have more freedom to choose jobs that suit them and while no job is likely to allow one to just ignore instructions, there are plenty that have way less oversight and micromanaging than a classroom. And the person is aware they are trading some of their freedom for money, whereas in school, you haven’t made a choice to tolerate orders for a benefit. You are mostly legally required to be there.

        And people can also learn better coping strategies, get counselling, etc as they grow up that may reduce their need for accommodations. And circumstances outside school can change, improving things too. Alison mentioned Foster kids, who often have little control in their lives. I suspect that some of those kids may struggle more with further control in the classroom, whereas when they become adults and have control over where they live, who they live with, what contact they have with birth families, etc, control at work may be less of a last straw.

        None of this is to say we don’t need to teach work skills or that students with disabilities should be allowed to do whatever they like and get excuses made for everything, just that accommodations need to be based on what a kid needs at the time and that work needs can be very different.

        1. OP for #3*

          OP here!
          (Still reading the comments..)

          I agree with the commenters with that it’s a worthy discussion of whether or not school is supposed to prepare people for the workforce. I don’t necessarily think that’s the case. There are a lot of goals in why we educate. I am swimming against the tide at my particular school and district, where “career readiness” is a significant goal affecting every decision made.

          I’d venture that 95% of all accommodated needs I’ve seen for students consist of extended time, preferential seating, ability to go to Guidance when needed, and breaking up projects into smaller concrete tasks. Once I had a student who was near-blind that I had to print all handout in size 60 font. Once I had a student who was deaf who I wore a mic while teaching his class.

          I’ve just never had a need for the student allowed to not listen to me or complete any tasks. I’m lucky that my students are overall motivated. I was waiting for a classmate of Mary’s to look around and believe there were no consequences for not doing anything.

          I 100% agree with the fellow commenters that schools have a ton of rules (usually designed with school safety in mind) that really regulate student choice and ability to move about freely that a normal workplace doesn’t have. Don’t even get me started on dress codes. I truly hope that Mary finds a life for herself where she enjoys what’s she’s doing.

          1. Ellis Bell*

            Wait – it sounds like her accommodation was more than just giving her some slack occasionally, allowing distractions, or avoiding giving her outright orders, but the accommodation actually allowed her to just not do any schoolwork at all? That’s a super odd thing for an EP to put in place on the plan for ODD/PDA traits. Usually the Ed Psych wants the student to be coached into participating more, just in a way that works for them. We have a lot of PDA, ODD, SEMH students, some of whom are so unnerved by school environments they have been outright school refusers. We try to get them to do some small tasks sporadically with praise/negotiation and build them up into a routine of doing so from there. Giving them lots of take up time, or one on one discussions in advance about how to get the tasks done, negotiation about priorities, or time outs when they’re overwhelmed are reasonable adjustments. Lots of students can’t handle the classroom at all, and need an alternative environment within the school where they can choose their order of subjects/tasks to work on, and flex their workflow. I don’t know how you’d even phrase “don’t expect them to do anything at all” on an education plan. I’m pretty upset for you that you weren’t supported more; this is something that needs a ton of people to work on it, to show a united front of support to the student, and is not something that can be managed just by sending the kid into your classroom with a free pass and zero expectations.

            1. DTC*

              yeah! another big difference between school accommodations and workplace accommodations is that in school, the kid doesn’t get to negotiate what they need; they have accommodations chosen for them by a group of adults, so, depending on the competence of those adults, the accommodations they get may not be what’s most helpful for them (or helpful at all; I know people who were given accommodations that were totally useless. one girl with epilepsy got time and a half on exams in case she had a seizure in the middle — except that if she had a seizure, there was no way she could finish an exam immediately afterwards! she needed to sleep and recover)

              so op #3, if you see a student with an accommodation that doesn’t seem to be helping them, it might be worth checking how that particular accommodation was decided on, if the kid thinks it’s helpful, etc.

          2. JSPA*

            Students tend to know when someone has real issues, as opposed to being a goof or slacker or cut-up. Wanting to get away with stuff is pretty common; wanting to be more like someone who’s having a miserable time integrating and participating is much less attractive.

          3. name*

            She didn’t appear to be listening or completing tasks but she got a 4. What percentage of your students received a 4 or a 5 on the AP exam?

            I get that it was disruptive and rude, but it also sounds like perhaps her accommodations worked?

            Also, there are jobs out there where results matter more than anything else so, depending on the real world job she gets, if she’s landing a 4 out of 5 appearing to try, she might be better prepared for the real world than some of your other students.

      2. bamcheeks*

        The big trend in schools in England right now is privately-funded academies which all compete on how strict they can be in uniform and behaviour, and claim that things like making students walk through corridors silently and ask permission to take off their blazers is “raising aspirations” and “preparing them for working life”. You have to have such a narrow, miserly, unimaginative definition of “working life” if you think you are preparing them for anything by not letting them take their blazers off when it’s warm.

        1. Azalea Bertrand*

          Hard agree. That’s not teaching anything but blind obedience when surely what we need more of is critical thinking?!

        2. Ellis Bell*

          Those rules can commonly be found in comprehensives, and are actually pretty well established! I was a bit amazed by them when I was new to KS3 teaching, but they seem unremarkable to me now. Maybe not complete silence in the corridors, but quietness in the corridors is a common rule. The blazer rule has been in effect everywhere I have worked. I agree it doesn’t do much to prepare people for actual jobs, but they are very logistically useful within schools for teaching behaviour, depending on the age and social knowledge of the kids. “Keep your full uniform on” is easier for some kids to understand, than gauging which parts they can take off, and in what context (Kids will undress and take off their shoes off at the slightest provocation; finding lost bits of clothing is also a logistical nightmare). “Silence in the corridors” is easier for some than figuring out just exactly how much yelling and stampeding you can get away with. We don’t instil total silence at my school, but “inside voices”, which they honestly do struggle with. Some of the newer schools are making students line up with shoulders on walls, which I definitely think is a bit too far. If you can get them chatting quietly as they go about and making room for people on the stairwell by sticking roughly to the left, that’s more impressive than military precision.

          1. Trillian*

            And for many kids, imposed order can be liberating and reassuring. Kids who have hearing difficulties or who get sensory overload from shouting, screaming, and jostling. Smaller kids who get banged about by oblivious larger kids in a crowd. Kids who get physically or verbally targeted under the guise of chaos.

          2. bamcheeks*

            It’s not so much that I think the rules are new, so much as the idea that this is something to compete on. We had the same rules about taking your blazer off when I was at school in the 90s, and I do believe that learning to comply with seemingly petty rules that are actually about crowd management or risk mitigation is an important life skill. What I object to is schools which are more interested in broadcasting their strict uniform or behaviour management policies over talking about their facilities for sport or performing arts or science, or what languages you can study at GCSE, because as a parent currently looking at secondary schools, that’s just incredibly depressing. And with my career professional hat on, I REALLY object to schools telling young people that strict uniform requirements are “preparation for professional life”, because standards for uniforms/workwear differ enormously across different sectors and I’m all about helping young people understand just how varied working life can be!

            1. Ellis Bell*

              Yeah, I think I’m definitely with you on it as a PR strategy, as well as it being literally nothing to do with preparation for professional life. The main reason parents get bashed prospective over the head with uniform and behaviour policies is not to compete, but because lots of parents ignore them, sign up to the school, and then argue at length with the school after enrollment about the rules.

            2. rebelwithmouseyhair*

              yeah, after wearing a uniform at school, one dealbreaker has always been that I refuse to wear a uniform. And my style of clothing is definitely unusual, nothing flouting dress code but not fitting in either. I remember reading the autobiography of the guy who founded De Lorean, he said that during his years at Ford he kept to the “black suit” dress code for managers, but always made sure to have a flamboyant cut. He stood out, but somehow there was never anything his manager could upbraid him over. I read that and thought, that’s the way to do it!

        3. Cora*

          Oh this is a thing with charter schools in the US too. They have draconian rules that I wouldn’t be okay with in an adult, and say the same things as rationale.

          1. epicdemiologist*

            I wonder if those kids will have the same problem my father did when he was discharged from the Navy at the end of WWII. My mother found him sitting on the bed staring into space, and asked him what was wrong. He said, “I’m waiting for somebody to tell me what to do!” (He did fine after a short but rough transition back to civilian life.)

      3. I didn't say banana*

        And even people with ODD/PDA develop better consequential thinking through their teens and 20s. Your boss might give you a task and you want to tell them to get lost, but you want to be able to pay rent more and you’re mature enough to make the better choice (sometimes)

        1. Azalea Bertrand*

          Absolutely. I have a PDA child and if you believe it’s genetic then I’m probably PDA myself. In my early 20s I absolutely walked off jobs for the most ridiculous of reasons, storming out in a fit of pique, but in my 30s I got better at seeing nuance. And while you may be able to walk out of one hospitality job into another without issue, as you advance in your career that becomes harder and you have to develop ways of not telling your boss they’re a moron, even if all the evidence says they are one.

          1. WantonSeedStitch*

            Kids also tend to get better at regulating their emotions as they get older, especially if they get help! My son is 4 and has started exhibiting all the traits of PDA on top of his (almost certain) ADHD. I have been reassured by friends with kids who have the same issues and are older that yes, it does get better. (I am very much hoping this is true. Life has been pretty miserable around here lately.)

            1. Nosy*

              I have a PDA 5 year old, and am most certainly PDA myself. My mom eased up on how strict and controlling she was when I was 16 and I remember that helping me more than anything else. So I’m trying to only be controlling when I absolutely must. No, you can’t climb the bookshelf (we installed a rock wall in the playroom instead). Yes, you must do your homework, but you can do it on the floor standing on your head if you really want to. Sure, if you want to wear your old Halloween costume to the grocery store then go for it.

              Good luck and all the best to you and your kiddo. PDA parenting is rough.

              1. WantonSeedStitch*

                Thank you! My husband and I have talked about “low-demand parenting,” and I think it’s something he believes in, but finds really difficult in practice. I suspect his own ND issues and the way he was raised make it challenging for him. I, OTOH, am NT and was raised by hippies.

        1. Azalea Bertrand*

          Pathological Demand Avoidance, it’s a subset of autism. Somtimes also called Pervasive Drive for Autonomy if the ‘pathological’ part makes people uncomfortable.

          1. Account*

            Just to clarify for anyone who doesn’t work in the field— ODD is an official diagnosis (by which I mean it’s in the DSM and I can diagnose you as that and bill your insurance), PDA isn’t. PDA is a concept that many people feel they identify with, like being a “highly sensitive person.” It may be a valid concept but it’s not a diagnosis.

            1. Nightengale*

              It isn’t a diagnosis but is generally considered a subset of the autism spectrum in the UK. It has been very slow to catch on in the US and so I have become a de facto local expert. I see a lot of kids previously diagnosed with ODD who fit the PDA profile.

              I find it useful as a framework – the idea is that demands set of high levels of anxiety and so the effective strategies include teaching ways to cope with anxiety and reducing demands. On a biological level this is to keep the brain out of fight or flight mode and to remain in a state where reason – and schoolwork – are possible.

              The traditional ODD framework in the US is to provide a lot of external structure and consequences. The fight-or-flight behavior receives a negative consequence. Or the child fails to earn a positive incentive. This leads to increasingly strained relationships and more anxiety and fewer coping skills which leads to. . . more fight or flight behavior. Interestingly, accommodative and collaborative approaches have been found to be very effective with kids labeled ODD but it is very rare to find schools or professionals to support this approach.

              1. Greengirl*

                That is fascinating. A friend who is a sped teacher in the US has a student with ODD and her best strategy is not saying no directly but making the no come from external factors. Ie no you can’t go to the cafeteria right now becomes “ oh but the cafeteria is closed right now.”

              2. Ellis Bell*

                Yeah, I’ve found advance negotiating and offering reasonable choices to a kid with PDA traits can actually get you a long way; you literally just have to rephrase the instructions into choices. This only works if the wider setting is suitable of course.

        3. Dawbs*

          pathological demand avoidance

          it’s often a subset of autism. My own kid says Libby Scott & Rebecca Westcott’s bin “can you see me” (aimed at the middle grade) is the best description of what it feels like, for further reading

      5. cabbagepants*

        This was basically my sister. She was a very smart person for whom “because I said so!” never held any water. She did fine academically but was ignored or hated but nearly all her teachers and authority figures in her life. Everyone thought she would end up in jail or dead in a ditch somewhere. Instead she spent a few years traveling and then got a PhD and became a professor. She still doesn’t follow traditional rules — her house is messy, she does the minimum at her job — but is very happy and has checked off basically every “success” milestone that our society has set.

        1. Lydia*

          Same. I did the equivalent of wearing headphones and watching cooking shows all through high school, my teachers hated my guts, and after a decade of bumming around I settled into the academic life. Supervisors and instructors still hate me, but that’s okay; we just ignore each other as far as possible.

        2. ferrina*

          Yes!
          “Because I said so” is just a test of how obedient you are, not how well you can uphold a social contract. “Because I said so” is also just a complete disregard of the other person and their needs; it’s a “my way or the highway” mentality, not a conversation where you try to find a mutually beneficial way of being.

        3. Blarg*

          My brother was similar. He went to college for one year, was bored and frustrated. They had him TA classes (as an 18 year old) trying to keep him engaged in his science program. He just hated it. He dropped out. He now owns an extremely successful franchise of a business that requires him to do manual labor and sales, and he is thriving. He sets his own hours, his behavior dictates his income (if he were as rude to clients and he was to teachers, he’d have no business), and most surprisingly to me, seems to be a great boss. School just wasn’t for him.

          Me, on the other hand, all I want to do is go to school…

        4. Koala*

          This is pretty much me. I *hated* school up until grad school, where I could really dig into things that interested me and asking weird questions was actually encouraged. I’ve had a pretty unconventional but fulfilling career path (That said I just got off the phone with a partner agency where the person I spoke with did not appreciate me asking why exactly she will accept this form of documentation but not this other form.)
          I’ve also been a therapist for ODD kids and honestly a pretty useful intervention is to acknowledge that a rule is petty or ridiculous but to think through what the impacts to *them* are for following or not following the rule. Not to get too far off topic but in addition to trauma etc, a lot of kids who are diagnosed with ODD are actually dealing with anxiety or sensory issues and are reacting to being asked to do something that makes them really uncomfortable or frightened. Adults around them don’t take the time to understand the underlying emotion and just see the refusal.

          1. cabbagepants*

            My FIL worked with special needs high-schoolers for a decade and he used a similar method, with success. “Yep, that rule is stupid, but if you tell Mr. Jones to fuck off and throw away your homework, you will fail out and not be able to get a job or money or a car, and Mr. Jones will be just fine. Toe the line now, check off the graduation boxes, and then move on with your life.”

      6. Falling Diphthong*

        Very often, a key part of the solution for a young person having difficulties is to plow through some more time. They get some extra brain development, extra life experience, and more freedom, all of which can help them deal better at 34 than at 15 or 9.

    3. DawnShadow*

      Just a note in case you are not from an area that uses ACT: the minimum score to get into college is generally 18-20. So a single digit score (particularly a 4!) is not by any means indicating that the student was academically fine.

      1. DawnShadow*

        Whoops, just went back and saw that it was a AP score not ACT! Honestly I’m not sure in that case why she was writing in, it’s clear that the student was doing just fine.

        1. Falling Diphthong*

          Most students in high school are not given the option of “Just show up and take the test, and if you can score a B or higher we won’t bug you about anything.” The only reason it worked for her is because the Plan that allowed her to pause and regroup got effectively interpreted as “Whatever will keep you from actively disrupting the class,” which it turned out was enough for her to self regulate through the hard social part while doing acceptably at the academic part.

          1. fhqwhgads*

            Which was always sort of hilarious to me because “show up and take the test and otherwise we don’t really care” was often very much was university was like…

        2. Jenesis*

          I think it was a compliment? like “This student is clearly smart, can be motivated under the right circumstances, and wants to go to college, but will her diagnosis be a barrier to her ever succeeding?” Also, she may not have been “fine” judging by her grade in the actual class – I remember struggling through AP Calculus A/B, getting a C in the class, and then being surprised by the 5 I got on the AP Exam.

      2. Nonsense*

        It was an AP test, which is graded differently to both the ACT and SAT. AP classes are a kind of intense high high school course that teaches college-level material, and your score on the exams counts as partial college credit. AP exams are scored on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest possible score (and 3.5 college credits). A 4 is pretty damn good.

        1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

          It’s been 20 years, but when I took Spanish V AP, 4 of 5 got you credit for 100-level Spanish and 5 for 200-level. I scored a “low” 5 (which was something like 91% weighted and curved) and that put me into 302 Spanish as a first-year student, which was a mixed blessing–free credits, but also strongly accelerated my progression into the courses where Spanish language became Spanish literature (and the time demands started competing with my Programming and Economics majors).

          I could have been that student–not from the diagnosis, but social ostracism (which, in fairness, I leaned into. It was the Aeneid, Ab Urbe Condita, and El Cantar de Mio Cid instead of Youtube in those days). As others have said, getting out of school actually made it easier; a paycheque and its implicit feedback every 2 weeks or so, some self-determination (e.g. often, I found myself in a class that was required for reasons, and taught by one professor at one time. Whereas there’s always another job out there. Maybe it doesn’t pay as well or have the same flexible hours, but I’ve found quitting a bad boss to be infinitely easier than quitting a bad teacher was) did a lot to improve engagement. Honestly, I still struggle with high-effort low-reward activities that remind me of rote homework–low hanging fruit for automation.

          (Yes. the Latin. Latin’s also probably why I deserved a 4 instead of a 5–I had a huge leg up in understanding the pluperfect subjunctive as a polite, formal jussive tense (e.g. Quiero un café v Quisiera bebir un café) and an extra “book” of vocabulary to pull upon from my self-guided Latin study. From boredom, I had honed the Madrileño accent convincingly enough for the New World. I tried to and would have taken Latin were it offered; Spanish was offered, so I took it. But, as I hinted above, I probably would have stuck the landing in Spanish 201 or 202 where I didn’t quite do so in 302).

      3. Stanley steamers*

        Yeah I wish the OP had mentioned for context that AP (advanced placement) test scores are on a 1-5 range. Anything above a 3 (out of 5) means that you can theoretically place out of that class when you get to college or something like that. YMMV because individual colleges or universities can still require everyone to take a subject requirement regardless of how you scored on an AP test.

        That being said: I do think the student’s specific accommodation, as set up by the school, was not doing her any favors.

        1. RIP Pillowfort*

          Yeah the AP Calculus A and B tests were the only ones I got a 4 in. That let me bypass the state required freshman math courses due to the credit and go straight back into calculus. It was basically do well enough and avoid College Algebra courses.

          I was so proud of that 4 though. I was one of 2 students that year in the class to get higher than a 3 and the other person got a 5.

          1. Bee*

            Man, AP Calc is the only time in my life I ever got a C (only one quarter, but still!), and I took the AP exam mainly to get myself out of the final exam and salvage what I could of my average for the year. And yet I still got a 4, which has me asking: how badly did everyone ELSE do that year? I was so happy when I got that score back, I had been hoping to scrape a 3.

        2. Irish Teacher.*

          Given the context, I assumed it was 4%, as generally it is the kids who underperform who remain in your mind and who you worry about later on.

          1. Paint N Drip*

            Contextually makes total sense but NO the student crushed it! And it was tossed out by the LW like ‘oh yeah and she got a 95% on the final’ – all else aside, obviously the kid is smart and I wish them the best of luck

          2. Bee*

            The context is actually “it looked like she wasn’t paying attention to anything but she was apparently retaining the information.”

    4. TyphoidMary*

      I’m a therapist who primarily works with adults who had chronically traumatic childhoods, and I love this comment. Thank you Double A.

    5. Spero*

      I think a lot of it though is that children whose diagnosis of ODD is masking cPTSD or ongoing trauma, if they are out of the family home that created the trauma and able to access counseling, the PTSD fades. It’s not just that work is different from school, it’s that their adult home life is very different from the environment and trauma of their youth and that affects their out of home behavior.
      Speaking as someone who got hit with an ODD diagnosis until the therapist spoke to adults other than my parents and realized that maybe there was a reason I was ONLY ‘oppositional’ when I lived at home and not when with family, at camps, etc…sure there are times I think ‘well that’s bull’ as an adult and have even said that at work. But being ‘oppositional’ is just a derogatory title for ‘trying to control things she’s not supposed to be in control of.’ The only thing that differentiates the control behaviors of a child who develops ODD behaviors due to cPTSD and a child who develops control behaviors like an eating or self harming disorder is that it inconveniences others. I was awful to a few teachers because I knew that they were the only adults in my life that I could BE AWFUL TO WITHOUT GETTING BEATEN because of it – they were the only tiny release valve on the pressure cooker. Now my life is 100% people like that, and the pressure is gone, the NEED for control is gone, and the behavior isn’t there either.

      1. Nosy*

        >I was awful to a few teachers because I knew that they were the only adults in my life that I could BE AWFUL TO WITHOUT GETTING BEATEN because of it

        I have an autistic PDA child whose behavior is worst when around me. There was a year where I was afraid my child legitimately hated me, but I realized it was the opposite – I was the safest adult in their life. Completely changed how I reacted to their behavior and things are better now because of that understanding.

        1. CommanderBanana*

          ^^ This. I nannied for a few years and parents would always lament how their child behaved worse for them than for anyone else. Of course they do! You’re the one person they know loves them unconditionally, they’re not sure about anyone else. It’s counterintuitive, but they feel safer with you than anyone else.

    6. Boof*

      I can’t say i’m an expert in any of this; i took sone psych rotations, including child psych and inpatient child psych, am in academia (so some informal teaching), and have a kid who has needed to go through some of the accommodations process (more for adhd; he is sweet and smart but definitely some self regulation issues more than average)
      From what I understand of ODD it sounds like Mary’s accommodation was rather successful; she was able to attend class, not disrupt class, and get a good score on the exam. Half the battle for her may well be letting her find school as a safe space and start to learn what works for her in the mainstream and how to navigate it. No that won’t fly at most jobs but it’s a step towards her figuring out how to interact with mainstream society and it probably worked.

  9. Coverage Associate*

    The student scored a 4 on the exam? IIRC, that’s a 4 out of 5 and gets her credit at most colleges, so the student was capable of absorbing material and taking the test, which is very structured. There are lots of jobs where employees can be individual contributors and receive instructions in writing and otherwise not have to pay attention (or pretend to pay attention) to a supervisor on the supervisor’s schedule.

    Especially because a lot of jobs suitable for someone in AP classes are much less structured than a high school day. In high school, you have no or very little control over what you study when. You can control the order you do your homework, but maybe not the order of several assignments in a single class.

    But a lot of jobs you can structure your whole work day, maybe your week. And it’s probably a minority of office jobs where you have to be respectful of, listening to, responding to a supervisor for several hours a day. When my bosses control how I write reports the way my high school teachers did, I complain about micromanaging. (I mean things like how complete my outline has to be before I start on paragraphs, or the order I research topics, or even the order I write the sections, not the “voice” or “tone,” which affects the final product.)

    1. nnn*

      This is extremely useful context for non-American readers – thank you! I didn’t have enough information to arrive at the conclusion that a score of 4 might be good (or even to suspect I should be googling it)

      3. Coverage Associate*

        You’re welcome. AP is “advanced placement.” The idea is to take an undergraduate level course in high/secondary school. There is a standardized test at the end to make sure that the students have grasped the material (and that the class followed the curriculum). A score of 4 or 5 out of 5 on the test means that the class will count towards both the high school diploma and the undergraduate degree. So in an undergraduate degree requires 100 total credits, getting a 4 on the test might mean the student only has to take 95 credits at university. (The university numbers are for example; I had a strange undergrad experience.)

        My father taught AP classes and went through special training for it. The standardized tests can have a writing component, but for the literature and history classes my father taught, the correct response will always be a certain number of paragraphs, usually 3 or 5. This is not clear from the test instructions. It’s the consequence of how the students are taught to write. (Introduction, Argument, Conclusion)

        Lawyers’ writing is more structured in a way, but at least I can suggest deviations to my bosses. For example, I might be addressing 3 issues, but one might be significantly more complex than the others, so it takes up half my report. Though I don’t get any input into what I am writing about, and I usually got to choose my topics in high school. (I don’t know much about ODD, but I do think lots about how work is similar and unlike secondary school, so I am providing examples of what freedoms each offers. Such a compare and contrast essay would be 4 paragraphs on an AP exam, I think. ;-)

        1. Anna*

          ODD is basically a catch-all “bad kid disease.” It’s very commonly racialized and weaponized. Once you have that diagnosis, ANY disagreement with ANY authority figure becomes a symptom of your condition. It can’t possibly be a legitimate grievance or complaint; no, the problem is that you are being Oppositional and Defiant. Just imagine, for a bit, what it would be like if *anything* other than perfectly and cheerfully complying with *everything* an authority figure wants you to do was treated as a pathological problem. If *every* time you had a disagreement, everyone assumed that the problem was that you were wrong and just trying to make a power play. Might that make you a bit upset? A bit distrusting of authority figures? But if you ever show any displeasure at how you’re treated, why, *that’s* a symptom of ODD, too! It’s pretty awful.

          And the criteria are just vague enough to be twisted to fit … pretty much any childhood psychological or neurological or developmental condition, which is why it usually gets applied to kids the person doing the diagnosis either doesn’t like or has less sympathy for. Consider autism. If you look at the symptoms that would get a white middle-class boy diagnosed with autism, those same symptoms will often be diagnosed very differently in kids who aren’t white middle-class boys. In white girls, the kid will be labelled “quiet” and “needing to work harder to reach her full potential,” but she is far less likely to get a diagnosis. In children of color, they are very unlikely to get a diagnosis of autism. The same symptoms will get labelled Oppositional Defiant Disorder. If a middle-class white boy has problems following instructions and has a very rigid view of the world, it’s autism. If a black kid has problems following instructions and has a very rigid view of the world, they’re a discipline problem and if they get any diagnosis at all, it’s that they have Bad Kid Disease, i.e. ODD.

          1. Joana*

            Can confirm the part about white girls getting called quiet and needing to work harder to reach their potential. Source: am white girl, was told I was quiet and needed to work harder to reach my potential while never being given the actual resources I needed even assuming I was completely neurotypical and just struggling with something.

            1. Freya*

              Me too, and being able to muddle through on my own did not mean that it was OK for all the adults to assume they could focus on other students who were more vocal and less bored.

          2. Redaktorin*

            To be fair, if you are a non-quiet white girl, you are likely to get an ODD diagnosis from people who are v shocked and upset that you didn’t live up to their race/gender expectations.

            There’s not really a way to win this sort of thing.

        2. Parenthesis Guy*

          120 credits, not 100. APs are usually worth 3 credits, sometimes 4 and occassionally more or less.

      4. D*

        A 4 is very good! AP tests are intentionally graded on a bell curve, so a plurality of people get 3s, a fewer number get 2s or 4s, and very few people get 1s or 5s. A 4 is a solid score and well above average.

      6. Lilo*

        A 3 is technically a pass but most colleges don’t really take it. A 4 is basically a commendable or exceeds expectations and a 5 is basically “outstanding”.

        1. fhqwhgads*

          Yeah plus AP advertises itself as “you’ll get credit with X score” but it’s totally up to the school whether they will. A lot will only let you use it to test out of a prereq, not give you actual credit towards a degree.

    2. Nathan*

      This is basically what I came here to say.

      I also want to add that ODD (a diagnosis I’m familiar with as my wife is a schoolteacher and a family friend has a child with this diagnosis as well) tends to fade with age. Alison is correct that ODD is a controversial diagnosis, but even if you disagree about the particulars, it can be a helpful framework for understanding how this child is likely to react in certain situations.

      But yes, even if the person in question retained ODD-type behavior into adulthood, it’s very possible that she could find an employer who is willing to work with her so long as her work product is good and on time.

      1. Paint N Drip*

        She’s smart and driven enough to study on her own if not in class, so perhaps a future freelancer

        1. fhqwhgads*

          Or she didn’t study at all and was actively listening when she seemed not to be, and didn’t need more than that.

      2. Slow Gin Lizz*

        I can imagine it fading with age as a kid where everything is controlled by adults grows up into an adult themselves and suddenly has a lot more freedom than they used to have. Sure, they need to figure out how to support themselves (barring a generous and well-off relative or friend supporting them) but otherwise being in a situation where they don’t have to be at a certain place at a certain time (school) or wear specific clothing or eat whatever food is put in front of them probably means they have a lot less that they will be oppositional about.

        I can imagine too that there might be people with ODD who would make for excellent freelancers. In this situation, say Mary was brilliant at the topic OP was teaching and started learning all they could about it, then made a career out of consulting for companies who needed that skillset. She gets to make up her own schedule, decide who her clients are, and pick and choose what kinds of projects she takes on. Kind of reminds me of my brother who hated school but is a fantastic musician and learned just enough in college about sound engineering to make a career out of it even though he dropped out sophomore year. He barely graduated high school but has an excellent career.

        Education-related side note: I really wish there were better alternatives for kids WRT education (at least in the US, where I am located). Schools aren’t the right learning environment for so many kids and it’s really unfair to set these kids up for failure and force them to keep doing it every day for 12 years. On top of that, what a waste of time for them to spend their formative years trying so hard to fit their square peg into the round hole of school when they would get so much more out of a situation that was right for them.

    3. Wilbur*

      There are a lot of jobs where you can structure your time any way you want. Getting them might be a bit tough if you’re confrontational in the interview, and advancement might be tough. In my company they strongly prefer people who have field, development, or manufacturing experience once you get to a certain level. Those areas tend to be a lot more structured.

  10. Daria Grace*

    #1: Academia really does have it’s own style of writing. I had to train myself out of it when I left and it sounds like I wasn’t in academia as long as you. The dense, high detail, specialised vocab laden style that needs slow reading is a tool that suits the needs of academia but its not the right tool for every task. Some problems need different tools. Your governor is most likely an intelligent person who could read things in academic English if they had the time but given the amount of material on a variety of topics they have to process and their tight schedule would benefit from something more concise and easier to move quickly through. Presenting the wrong style is like insisting someone clean the bathroom with a toothbrush. They can get the job done that way but it’s not really the right tool for purpose and will lead to frustration.

    After so long in academia you are probably not really in a good position to assess the accessibility of what you are writing on your own because you are so very used to reading and writing in a particular style. I’m not a fan of AI for this purpose (or most purposes for that matter). Instead I’d encourage you to lay aside the offense, get curious and ask people questions about what specifically isn’t working about your writing. Is it that your sentences are too long? Are you using too much long and/or specialised vocab? Are you trying to jam too much into your paragraphs? Are you assuming knowledge your readers likely don’t have?

  11. Pyjamas*

    I foresee OP1 will be looking for a new job soon because they clearly aren’t taking their boss seriously. The “collegiate” vocabulary is the tip of the iceberg

    1. Coverage Associate*

      Or maybe a job communicating with Britons regularly. Our US offices had training last month about writing for our London clients, and it confirmed what I had observed so far at this job about it being a less direct and more formal style. A lot of my boss’s sentences would get cut into 3 sentences by my teachers in high school through law school. There was an example, meant to be exaggerated but plausible, where a 2 line American email was half a page in “British.”

      I would be really interested if any British teachers could chime in on both the writing styles issue and the secondary school issue. It’s hard to reconcile my English co workers’ writing style with everything I have learned about simple and direct writing, and I am interested to learn what is emphasized there at the secondary and undergraduate levels.

      1. Yorkshire Tea Lady*

        I’m British, a highly experienced communications professional, and now an academic.

        It’s probably a quirk of your London clients. We (as a nation) are as capable of using Plain English as anyone, there’s some great resources and equally, most of us are pushed for time so if an email needs to be 3 sentences, it’s 3 sentences.

        OP1 – bear in mind that the average reading age you should be hitting if you are writing for a wide audience is Grade 4 or Grade 5. That doesn’t mean “dumbing down” – it’s means using language to get through, otherwise you are just making noise, not communicating effectively.

        Writing at this level is a skill, and ChatGPT is a valuable tool to help you learn what an appropriate register looks like whilst you learn it.

        1. Lenora Rose*

          I don’t understand that thought – ChatGPT is doing the work for you, and is often doing it wrong (You’d have to check it over for inappropriate synonyms, for hallucinations and the like, and it didn’t reason, so it can’t explain its reasoning if you want to know why it made the choices it made), how does that teach you anything? Better to just do the rewrites yourself.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        British English teacher here. We have plain English campaigns here too, and I had similar feedback to OP when I left university and went into news writing. Many Britons read tabloids, (they can be read with a reading age of 10) so there’s not necessarily a culture of over complicating writing. Undergraduate writing definitely favours complexity, (I had to give a police statement as an undergraduate and she had to beg me to speak more plainly), but GCSE (high school) level is not very complex. I suppose it depends on your definition of very complex, though. You get points in the exams for vocabulary usage and sentence construction, but that’s anything beyond the plainest Anglo Saxon words, and using a variety of sentence structures, including short.

      3. The Prettiest Curse*

        I work in higher education in the UK and our writing style is definitely not super formal, unless you are writing to a highly distinguished professor or a big cheese in university administration. I suspect it might be a class thing – if your London office has a high percentage of privately educated posh folk, their writing style is usually more formal because it’s used as a class signifier.

        I did notice that US newspapers generally had a more informal writing style than the equivalent UK newspapers when I was living in the US. The NY Times is easily as fusty as any UK broadsheet, but the rest of the US papers, not so much.

      4. Green great dragon*

        I think it’s your London clients, not Britons as a whole. We may have a slightly higher prevalence of people who think it’s clever to use long words and convoluted sentences but it’s still rare, and perhaps a greater use of ‘Would you be able to send over the doc today’ rather than ‘send over the doc today’, but I would be very surprised to get a half page email to convey two sentences of info.

      5. bamcheeks*

        US/UK academic writing is the other way around: US academic writing in the arts and social sciences is notably more complex than UK academic writing tends to be, or at least when I was doing a PhD in the 00s. When we talked about academic writing, “write more clearly than Americans” was talked about as an objective.

        I do think there’s a lot more conscious teaching of writing in the US than there is in the UK, or at least there was when I was coming through school and university in the 80s-00s. It was very much, “you will keep writing stuff and we’ll keep correcting it and hopefully at some point you’ll sort of absorb what you’re supposed to be doing”. And my degrees were in English! So we did lots and lots of writing and close reading, and I got a lot of feedback on my writing, but very little explicit teaching on the components of writing. I mostly figured that out for myself. When I met Americans who had been explicitly taught five-paragraph essay structures and not to use dangling modifiers, I was kind of jealous!

        I do think this has changed since I was in education, both at school and in higher education, but I wonder if what you’re seeing is a hangover from there being much more focus on different registers and on deliberate teaching of different writing styles and structures in the US than in the UK. Outside of things like journalism and creative writing where writing style is very deliberately taught, I think we’re very much left to get on with it on our own, and whether or not you prize learning to write varies significantly.

        1. Emmy Noether*

          I spent a few years in the US as a preteen, and the five-paragraph-essay was really hammered home and strictly enforced in school there. Then I got back to Germany and it was just completely not a thing!

          I did find it useful as a basic structure for my writing, but quickly abandoned the strict format. For one thing, five paragraphs is really short for an essay. It also made my writing repetitive and boring – funnily enough I always received my best grades when I felt inspired and was completely freestyling it. The structured approach is really useful for those times one does not feel particularly inspired, though. It’s also one of those “you can break the rules once you master the rules” kinds of things.

          The other thing I’ve observed as someone for whom English is a foreign language is that in English, simple sentence structure and brevity are generally considered virtues in a way they are not in German and French, for example.

          1. bamcheeks*

            ahhhh, I still remember the absolute joy and disbelief we felt in A level German class when we successfully understood one of those “the only-opening-on-Tuesdays-except-in-December-when-they-open-on-Tuesdays-and-Wednesdays shop was closed” sentences! German’s agglomerative words get a lot of attention, but I feel like the fact you can put an entire descriptive phrase before a noun needs more love.

            1. Emmy Noether*

              Run-on sentences are an art form in German. I mean, Thomas Mann got a Nobel prize with his half-page-length (I’m not even exaggerating) sentence writing style. Good writing is making it still make sense despite the length.

              When I write in English, I always have to go through and check where I could break up a sentence into two or three. It’s really hard because one is also not supposed to start a sentence with a conjunction, apparently?

          2. Ellis Bell*

            We teach essay structure now, but it is fluid depending on the level of the class and on the type of writing, or imaginary audience. We wouldn’t hammer home a particular type of structure over and over unless the level of the class was pretty low. There was no structure taught at all when I was in school.

          3. KatCardigans*

            Many schools in the US preach the 5 paragraph style HARD when students are newer to writing essays, and then more advanced classes allow for length, complexity, and experimentation with structure.

            In my experience, though, many students who are less confident writers stick to the 5 paragraph format long past the point when it is serving them well. And students who are more confident writers probably don’t need that structure for as many years as they are expected to use it, and they can find it restrictive. Still a useful tool, though!

          4. sparkle emoji*

            I will say as an American, the strict 5 paragraph requirement tends to be dropped for more complicated essays/topics. The purpose is more as an approachable framework to learn essay writing for young students. I definitely was not being held to that format ever in university.

        2. londonedit*

          I agree, bamcheeks, and I see that now in my work as an editor. We have a very simple house style for our books, and it’s mainly about maintaining author voice, maintaining clarity, and maintaining consistency throughout. So authors are broadly left to write in their own voice, and then we just polish it to make it consistent and make sure it adheres to the basic house style that we use.

          Whenever I work with US authors, they really, really, really nitpick on style and grammar. They want to know exactly what our rules are about commas, semi-colons, lists, etc – and they want to know exactly which system for referencing they should use (answer: whichever one you like, as long as it’s consistent and it’s not cluttering things up for the reader – our books are not academic textbooks, they’re general non-fiction). I can practically see them throwing their hands up across the Atlantic when I tell them ‘It’s fine, go with your preference as long as it’s consistent throughout’.

          When I was at school we were taught how to structure a basic essay, but there was no five-paragraph rule (that is really short!) and the teaching/thinking at the time was that writing should be more about individual expression than slavishly following the rules of grammar. Same at uni – it was about expressing your own arguments, writing coherently, writing clearly, saying something interesting and being able to back up your own arguments. Teaching at uni (and I did an English degree) wasn’t prescriptive – you read the books, you had a lecture on the books, but then you were expected to go away and form your own ideas, and you were expected to talk about those ideas in seminars and tutorials, and to bring those ideas together in your final essays (we had a 2,500-word essay to write for each course at Christmas, and a 6,000-word essay for each course to write for May, and we studied four courses a year in the second/third years – the first year was more of an introduction and had informal essays and then exams at the end of the year).

          There definitely has been a shift in primary education towards much more formal teaching of grammar and writing – and again, that’s controversial, because people are throwing up their hands about six-year-olds being force-fed fronted adverbials at the expense of creativity.

          1. bamcheeks*

            We had a SUPER frustrating conversation with my 9yo’s teacher last year where we said, “We’re really happy to hear she’s meeting expectations — what are you doing to challenge her?” and the teacher’s response was, “Well, if I’ve challenged the rest of the class to use ten fronted adverbials in their writing, I’ll suggest that she uses fifteen–” WHAT, omg.

            Generally, I think a more structured approach to literacy is a good thing and more inclusive — but that was kind of a headdesk moment!

            1. londonedit*

              Madness! I was lucky because I went to a very small rural primary school, and the headteacher there just decided they were going to emphasise spelling and grammar with us because that’s what she believed in, even if the National Curriculum at the time had moved away from a more structured approach. I’m really glad I ended up having that grounding in literacy from an early age.

              Of course now we have universities scrapping their English degrees altogether because they’re not seen as worthwhile or useful, but that’s an entirely different matter!

          2. sb51*

            The five-paragraph essay can be longer than five actual paragraphs, but it’s a really useful structure especially for things like the AP exams and other exams where you need to very quickly put together a short, single-topic essay, likely handwritten (so you can’t rearrange on the fly).

            For anyone who hasn’t encountered it, it’s one introductory paragraph ending in a thesis statement, three example paragraphs, one concluding paragraph tying the examples back to the thesis.

            1. Falling Diphthong*

              The five-paragraph essay can be seen as shorthand for the ability to put together an argument that goes:
              1) Here is what I want to do.
              2) Here are the supporting facts explaining why this is a good idea.
              3) Which is why my plan makes sense.

              It doesn’t have to be five paragraphs, or even written.

              Obviously I would like an English course to move beyond that and do other things. But if a student isn’t able to bang out a five-paragraph essay as an example of this skill, I absolutely see the argument for coaching them until they can. Not because “As a machinist/radiologist/influencer you will need to write one page essays.” But because all of those jobs will involve some version of “This is what I want to do, and this is why, so we should do it.”

      6. amoeba*

        I mean, I’m German, so take everything with a grain of salt – but my boyfriend went to (a good) school in the US for two years, taking AP classes and all those things, and he was taught to use fancy words (because vocabulary! So important!) and basically writing in a style that I can only describe as, errr, pompous. I’m sure that’s not the case everywhere – I’ve also read a lot of American “style guides” etc. that very much emphasise the opposite – but seems to be a thing in some places, at least.
        As an outsider to both countries who reads and enjoys texts from both regularly, I haven’t really seen any big differences…

        1. Falling Diphthong*

          In the US: Oldest had very elaborate and florid writing in high school. (Speaking as the person proof-reading her essays.) In college, majoring in the hard sciences, she really worked at making her writing more clear, straightforward, and accessible. So it was disappointing when she first took the GRE, and smashed the general part but got a low score on the essay. So she took it again, using on the essay all the overblown flourishes from her high school years, and got the top score.

          1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

            Yea. There is an element of being punished for not writing that way through higher education, then get punished for doing so in the real world.

    2. H*

      It is astounding to me that LW1 has been in their role for two years and cannot grasp the importance of plain language. They briefly reference what I believe to be a PIP, and that’s no surprise to me given the tone of their letter.

      1. Lilo*

        I’m a bit astounded that LW is on a PIP and doesn’t grasp how serious this situation is. You’re on the verge of getting fired, LW. And, to be very clear, not wrongly fired. You have to be able to take feedback and adjust your writing for context.

        1. StressedButOkay*

          That’s the part that caught my attention. Your manager has been instructing you for two years to use clearer language, possibly among other issues, and you haven’t meet those expectations. The writing isn’t what the organization needs and that is a critical job aspect.

          OP, I really hope it’s not too late. But it might be.

        2. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

          Are PIPs often used in academia? I felt like LW perhaps doesn’t really have the framing and background knowledge of “non-academia” (industry?) to recognise that this “improvement plan” is in fact a PIP (de facto or actual), although they seem to recognise that the improvement plan is a place for the boss’s complaints. I almost wondered if LW thinks everyone has their own formal improvement plan, with their own areas of weakness on it.

    3. Disappointed Australien*

      It’s slightly weird to me because I’m used to academics who pride themselves on being able to explain at least the conceptual level of their work to five year olds. Or younger, in the case of Dr “I try to work out how we can change the rules so people don’t want to break them as often” (my uncle is a specific type of forensic psychologist).

      A solid chunk of my random IT job is explaining the complex rules behind the software in a way that makes sense to users, and often also working out what has made them unhappy. It’s pleasantly surprising how often the explanation works, and if not how willing many users are to think beyond their specific case and suggest changes that will improve the system for everyone.

      But heck, I use long words and jargon at least as much as the next trademark evaluator :)

    4. Emmy Noether*

      LW clearly has a lot of contempt for their supervisor, which is never a good sign.

      I suspect that if it was a more respectful relationship (and possibly expressed by the supervisor not as “dumbing down”, but as adjusting the writing style to the company’s voice, or maybe as “quick read”), LW would be more receptive to the feedback.

      1. No name username*

        Yes – I can imagine the manager telling her to write in plain English and LW replying with a lecture on writing standards. LW is so busy fighting her case she appears to be dismissing the fact her manager has put her on a PIP.

      2. Falling Diphthong*

        Yes, it’s the contempt more than the specific problem that I think means this working relationship is doomed.

      3. Lilo*

        I agree with this. LW is framing the supervisor as being “intimidated” by large words when the supervisor is merely asking a government employee to adopt plain language standards. Plain language initiatives are extremely common in government and law right now. That contemptuous attitude combined with LW’s dismissal of feedback, is a rather large red flag.

        1. sparkle emoji*

          Yep. I’m not “intimidated” by big words; I can use polysyllabic words with the best of ’em. But I also have a job that involves communicating with a broad audience with different educational experiences and language backgrounds. I would be failing my job if I insisted on writing like OP did in her letter.

    5. EventPlannerGal*

      Agreed. OP doesn’t sound like they understand the extent of the problem here – they’re on a PIP and they’re still arguing about vocab?

      There’s also a bit of a sod’s law thing where the second you make a big deal out of something you’re supposedly very good at, you immediately screw it up. If I was OP’s manager and had heard them going on and on about their wonderful collegiate writing style and then read sentences like “I pride myself on clear writing, have ghostwritten for published authors, and pride myself on my written communication skills” (why have you said almost exactly the same thing twice in one sentence?) or “I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices” (why not “I write clearly”?) I wouldn’t be terribly impressed.

      1. pocket microscope*

        I was coming here to say this! So proud she said it twice. LW, no one’s infallible when it comes to this stuff, and you very clearly don’t have enough awareness of your audience. Stop congratulating yourself on your academic prowess and look around you.

    6. el l*

      Yep. As so often: Ability gets you hired, attitude gets you fired.

      Because it’s not a difference in styles. It’s that manager has repeatedly and clearly told them how they need them to communicate to reach their clients. That’s a core job responsibility.

      And not only is OP clearly not doing it (as evidenced by the PIP and bringing in AI for an important message), but they are being defiant against that feedback.

  12. Zanshin*

    re LW1 … small things really add up… when I had to participate in writing client care plans everybody would start off “client will utilize…” until I started changing it to “use” every single time.

      1. Lizzy May*

        It’s so bad. There are times when utilize is the better word choice but some people just seem allergic to using “use.”

        1. Captain dddd-cccc-ddWdd*

          We have a bad case of this at my company too. When someone asks “is there something in this (software) library we can utilise rather than reinvent the wheel?” it’s so tempting to say no but there’s probably something we can use!

      2. Slippers*

        My technical writing instructor in undergrad (one of the most useful courses I’ve ever taken) forbid the use of the word “utilize.”

    2. Agent Diane*

      Yes! This is such a pet peeve my family look at me every time someone uses “utilize” on TV.

      Also, “commence” can just be “start”.

      As a rule of thumb, if it sounds like it has a Latin root, there’s probably a shorter, simpler Anglo-Saxon word available. This is why English is a language that has class connotations.

      1. EllenD*

        I always used to tell my team not to use words ending ‘tion’ or ‘sion’, if they were derived from a verb. So instead of ‘we will undertake a consultation’ use ‘we will consult’, or ‘for your retention’ could be ‘for you to retain’ or best of all ‘for you to keep’. As Agent Diane says if you can avoid the words with Latin roots, there is usually a much simpler word. The advantage is that by using the verb, your writing will use fewer words, and be easier to understand. I had a boss who told me to aim for the style of The Sun or Daily Mirror, as they used simple language to explain complex issues and influenced the outcome of Elections.

        I once re-wrote some draft guidance, in plain English, and was told by the original drafter that it was rather direct, but I saw that as a compliment. He’d got a degree from Oxford University, while the people following the guidance might not have gone to university.

        1. londonedit*

          Yes, totally agree. Occasionally in the UK some hand-wringing goes on about the supposed ‘dumbing down’ of broadcast/newspapers/society in general. But it’s not ‘dumbing down’, it’s making things more accessible. When the BBC and the major broadsheet newspapers were founded, the assumption was that they were only for the educated classes, and were targeted as such. The language used was very deliberately exclusionary, because it was for the educated elite. Of course, now, broadcasters and publishers and newspapers want to appeal to a broad audience, and in fact the BBC’s philosophy is all about being as inclusive as possible, so their language has shifted much more towards Plain English. That doesn’t, as some people think, mean ‘people in this country are getting more stupid’, it just means broadcasters are tailoring their output to be understood by the widest possible audience.

      2. Emmy Noether*

        There’s a really funny effect where people who are native speakers of romance languages will often find “higher level” tests of English vocabulary easier than “lower level” tests, because the “higher level” words more often have latin roots!

      3. MassMatt*

        I remember my junior high principal would always say “at the present time” instead of “now”. No idea why, it certainly didn’t make him seem smarter, nor the occasion more formal. For whatever reason he would never use one or two words when five of six were available.

        He was also mostly bald but had terrible dandruff, so of course student mockery focused mostly on that.

    3. Media Monkey*

      i my first job my (ex-teacher) boss used to correct everyone’s writing by taking out all the “basicallys”, “firstlys” and swapping out utilise for use and so on. all the stuff that people utilise (lol) because they think it makes them sound clever but actually doesn’t!

    5. The OG Sleepless*

      My husband has me read over things he has to write to clients sometimes, and I’m always changing “due to the fact that…” to “Because…”

  13. margaret*

    OP1, I highly recommend taking a course in Plain Language. Google this–it’s official government guidance. My university HR offered a free course and I learned a lot about writing clearly.

    1. Safely Retired*

      I’m no academic, but I am certainly prone to using more of my vocabulary than is strictly necessary, and even more so to structuring my sentences in ways not in line with common usage. I was in IT for 30 years, and an important aspect of the job was writing specifications and documentation. Clarity was an imperative! I can’t remember when, but at some point the boss brought in someone to teach a one day class to all of us programmers. I still have the book we were given, “Technically-Write!” by Ron Blicq. Used copies are available on Amazon.

  14. Waving not Drowning*

    LW4 – My sister had a similar situation a few weeks ago. Her husband had a serious medical episode one morning. He was VERY sick, to the point of not recognising his wife or family members. Her work she could call, and say nope, can’t come in, husband very sick, but she didn’t have the contact details for his boss/workplace, and couldn’t access his work phone for contact details. She ended up messaging someone who knew someone he worked with, and got the details to them that way, but it added stress to a very stressful situation. Not sure if his workplace had my sisters details, or at what point they would have tried to contact her if they did.

    Typing this out, it reminds me, I should give my husband my workplace contact details if needed – he knows the first name of my manager, and what department I’m in, but, has no way of contacting her direct – however, he does have access to my non work provided phone, so he might be able to contact that way (he works for a smaller organisation, with a much easier to find phone number).

  15. Sparrow*

    LW1, a comparison for you:

    Imagine you used to work as a chef at a steakhouse, and now you work at a place that exclusively does seafood—but you keep insisting that you’re only going to make steaks. When customers order the lobster, you send them a porterhouse. When they order the steamed clams, you send them a filet mignon. When they order crab cakes, you send steak bites.

    In this situation, if your boss tells you “I need you to stop making steaks and start sending people what they actually order”, that does not mean that she’s too stupid to understand that steaks are also a type of food, it does not mean that she’s belittling or insulting you, and it doesn’t mean that she thinks steaks are always bad in every context. It doesn’t even mean that the customers who are upset that you sent them a salmon filet hate salmon and never want to eat it. All it means is that you are doing something in a context that it does not belong in.

    I think it might also help you a lot here to remember that writing for a general audience is not a less intelligent form of writing, and that the ability to write in plain, clear, easily understandable language that people can quickly get through is actually a very difficult skill to master—and, right now, it may be a skill that you currently lack. Acknowledging that doesn’t mean that you’re not excellent at academic writing; it just means that these two writing styles are very different from each other and require very different skills to do well.

  16. LifebeforeCorona*

    OP4 I’ve had jobs where an ICE, In Case of Emergency contact number is required. It’s also a good idea to have an ICE contact number in your phone contact list. They’re listed as ICE to make them easy to find if someone has your phone.

    2. Brain the Brian*

      Yep. I have epilepsy (thankfully well controlled with medication), and my phone’s emergency contact list has my next-of-kin, flatmate, boss, and relevant doctors to make sure that someone in all areas of my life can be contacted if I have an unexpected seizure.

    3. amoeba*

      Well, yes, but I’d think most people would put their spouse/a familiy member/close friend for that? I mean, if I’m in a car accident, I really wouldn’t want my boss to be notified of that first, of all people – he’s lovely, but we’re not *that* close (and my partner still wouldn’t know). So, yeah, I’d just share my bosses e-mail with my boyfriend, seems much easier.

      (I mean, I’m sure he would know how to contact my boss, anyway, because it’s firstname-lastname@company.com, and he does know the name! He also has the phone number of one of my direct colleagues for private reasons, so I think I’d be fine.)

  17. kanomi*

    1. Your boss is probably correct. Academia is notorious for obscurantist jargon.

    3. ODD can be used in lieu of a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder in juveniles.

    1. Meow*

      ODD is also super comorbid with ADHD, a lot of kids “grow out of it” if/when they are able to manage their ADHD better.

      1. Freya*

        As someone with ADHD and ASD, most of the time when I find myself being unnecessarily combative, it’s because there’s a sensory issue that I’m not addressing. And of course when you’ve got something poking you in the brain and refusing to stop, you’re going to be short-tempered!

        (usually for me, it’s an excess of light, an excess of sound, allergies, a dog hair stuck in my clothing and poking me, people changing things without giving me a chance to do it myself and thereby self-regulate, people not listening when I say what I need and assuming I need the opposite, or my bra being the wrong size for that particular day)

  18. Almost Academic*

    LW1 – Academic language certainly is its own style! I say this as a reformed academic who writes for business audiences now. What helped me to transition my style was to write out bullets and then not modify them much when I was turning them into paragraphs or full sentences. I found that cut a lot of the flourishes that were stylistically creeping into my writing. I’ve also used strategies of running it through an LLM to get suggestions on how to rewrite/simplify, like your boss is suggesting. I then modify again from there, since the tone of an LLM isn’t quite right usually either, but this helps strike a middle balance.

    Keep in mind that the average reading comprehension level in the US is ~7th grade. Expect about half of your audience to be below this. Even for professional levels of writing, outside of academia I typically aim for a 6th grade level of writing, with added complexity coming from field-specific terminology. There are online reading level evaluators that can help you judge this and edit down. It’s not necessarily a matter of intelligence, it’s also due to factors like attention span for busy executives/government officials, people with english as a second language, folks with reading disorders, and a whole host of other reasons. When you want to get your message across to a broader audience, generally aim for 6th grade level.

    1. Filosofickle*

      I do a lot of writing, generally corporate business-to-business. I started academic-style a long time ago and my work has gotten continuously tighter over time — shorter sentences, less complex structures, plain language, nothing unnecessary. And yet nothing changed my writing more than testing messaging with colleagues and clients in other countries! I learned to make things even MORE straightforward, with fewer metaphors and flourishes. It’s hard (and sometimes a bummer for my poetic soul) but it’s necessary to be understood.

    2. I am Emily's failing memory*

      Most newspapers target a 10th-11th grade reading level at most, and more like 7th or 8th grade for pieces that deal with less technical or specialized topics (as those tend to make more than a few long, obscure words necessary).

      1. Clisby*

        Yes, I was a newspaper reporter for years, and in journalism school we were taught to aim for 8th grade level. Even reporters for a newspaper like the Wall Street Journal, which covers a lot of specialized financial topics, write in a straightforward way – overall, I’d say they’re about 10th-11th grade level.

        1. Paint N Drip*

          My work is in communicating financial topics to a WIDE audience and I aim for 6th grade, and still get questions

  19. Certaintroublemaker*

    LW5, I would feel much better about my new manager going on leave if I had had interviews that included team members and the person who would be filling in. Even if I didn’t know ahead of time they would do more of my onboarding and training, I’d feel more comfortable with them if I had considered them as part of the environment I was joining, in addition to the hiring manager.

    1. Smithy*

      I had a unique situation of starting a job just after my hiring manager left for maternity leave. In that case because she was so far along, this was disclosed very upfront during the interview process and so I felt a lot of trust but also very aware of what the process would look like, who my interim supervisor would be, etc.

      Part of what made me feel like it was a nonissue was that had a lot of faith that there was a plan. A plan for how I’d be hired and onboarded and managed until the hiring manager I was interviewing with returned.

      So I do think if a hiring manager wasn’t as ready to share the news – that could be augmented by being more thorough on the onboarding process.

    2. ferrina*

      Yeah, talking to the candidates about what will happen while you are out is a great thing to do! Onboarding can make or break a new job, so having a strong plan and giving the candidate peace of mind is essential.

  20. Middle school teacher*

    Re: letter 3: Students with Oppositional Defiant Disorder can, obviously, be extremely intelligent. AP classes, taught as directed, are hardcore.
    That your student was able to learn and earn their credit is huge.
    What surprises me is that she didn’t have a BIP (Behavioral Intervention Plan). Writing a solid, meaningful, and solution-focused plan is essential. Obviously a student with ODD might (will probably) struggle with/push back on such a plan, but that’s where other school staff and systems come into play. As do het parents/family.
    It truly takes a village.
    Signed, a teacher who had about ten students like Mary.

    1. Nightengale*

      I have about 50 patients like Mary

      The challenge with every BIP I have seen is that they focus on consequences (both supposed positive and negative) and research is suggesting that tends to backfire in kids with an ODD label and probably everyone else. I say ODD label because I have yet to meet a kid who comes to me with an ODD diagnosis where the underlying explanation isn’t some combination of ADHD, anxiety or missed autism. The collaborative problem solving approaches have been slow to catch on but extremely effective in schools that have implemented them. So at this point I am in a quandry whether I recommend families ask schools follow the law and create a BIP or seek a more accommodative approach that is more likely to be beneficial.

  21. Hired Goon*

    OP1 – Hi! I’m a fellow writer with an academic background who’s learning how to ‘dumb it down’. I know how deeply felt language and written style is, and how much of a struggle it can be to shift into being more ‘user-friendly’ without feeling like you’re compromising your abilities, rewriting your very style, or even downplaying the importance/specificity of what’s being said.

    Start small. Swap synonyms (as Zanshin mentioned above, ‘use’ is better than ‘utilise’) and see how it reads. If you’ve used a comma in a longer sentence, make two smaller sentences. Consider how articles on The Conversation [dot] com are written – they’re all extremely well-informed, but are written outside of the academic tone.

    Also try to keep in mind your work with the state workforce agency is a very different hat to academia. You’ll be able to continue using your current collegiate vocabulary, but just in the right place at the right time. Putting words into layperson’s terms but with an expert’s understanding backing it is your opportunity to demonstrate your competence and ability as a writer. All the best to you!

  22. IT Project Manager*

    I have worked from home for 24 years in WA and my boss is in TN, in addition to having my boss under emergency contacts in my phone, I taped a piece of paper with her name and phone number on my desk and told my husband where to find it. I added that 2nd part after a co worker unexpectedly went into the hospital and wasn’t conscious and she told me how her husband had to track down an office phone number and then get someone who could look up her manager’s information. Like me, she was remote and had been for years and her manager was across the country.

  23. Pink Geek*

    LW4 my husband and I have a list of emergency contacts for each other. We put our boss’ info on there.

    1. PercyJax*

      Yes, I’m starting to think that might be a good idea! We already have our in laws numbers and everything, but I never thought about work info before. Reading through the other comments, it would be way better to have that info on hand instead of needing to search for it during what’s already a stressful situation…

      1. Haijlee*

        Yes! I came here to say this. Not only should you have each others work numbers/names of contacts but think about who else you’d need to call in case of emergency. Family members, pet sitters, PASSWORDS to important accounts should your spouse be incapacitated. I have a un/pw book (because I refuse to use a digital one) that has all of the info for accounts, websites, and other things someone would need if I were in a coma or passed away. Its in an easy-to-find if you were looking for it place and I make a habit of reviewing it every 6 months. If I die, I don’t want my spouse to have to call someone to get access to anything they could have just looked up in the book. This is also true for if we both are incapacitated at the same time. It may sound grim, but watching the hell a close family member had to go through figuring out things like “Who is the propane company since there is no name/number on the tank? What bank accounts did she have open? Did she have a YMCA account I need to cancel and if not, what are these charges?” was awful. I vowed never to cause anyone that kind of torment.

  24. Lemonwhirl*

    I have nearly 30 years of experience in technical writing and software design. I just started a Master’s degree program, so I’m trying to get the hang of writing academic papers and reflective journals.

    The key to any good writing is giving the audience what they need to know by using the words and structures that are most likely to aid understanding in as short a time as possible. Academic writing is a very specific type of writing, and it’s great for an academic audience, but it’s not intended for a general audience.

    Bullet points to list your key messages and then ruthlessly cutting any word that isn’t essential to the meaning are two good ways to write more plainly and directly. (And let me tell you, after writing two papers this weekend, I would LOVE to see academia replace the literature review with a bulleted list of the work that forms the basis of understanding plus links to those works. It’s absolutely nervewracking to try to write a literature review that isn’t just dense paragraphs of quotes or inadvertent plagiarism. I can build a narrative and provide a logical throughline for the research I’ve done, but there’s only so many different ways to paraphrase core concepts.)

    Also, from one writer to another, the more that you can separate yourself from the work, the happier you’re going to be. Constructive criticism about using plain language is not a slight on you or an insult to your audience’s intelligence. It’s an opportunity to learn how to improve key skill so that your work is more effective.

  25. Trixie melodian*

    As a corporate communications professional, I feel for your manager.

    I work in healthcare with a lot of incredibly intelligent people, most of whom couldn’t write an accessible consumer-friendly document if the consumer’s life depended on it (which it frequently does).

    Plain English is not “dumbing down” (and I hope that term is your interpretation, not your manager’s actual words.)

    Long words and convoluted sentence structure don’t make you sound smarter. Nor does a five page document when two pages will suffice.

    Simple, succinct language in a straightforward format is preferred by almost everyone. It’s especially relevant to busy people like high level execs and politicians – if you can give them a well-written 1 page executive summary instead of a 15 page analysis, you’ll be their favourite person.

    2. Cthulhu’s Librarian*

      Exactly.

      I recently saw a document someone was preparing for leadership at my org, and the “executive summary” was a full fifth of the file they were going to send (call it a 20 page summary, with 80 pages of detailed support).

      I told them they were wasting their own time and leadership’s. No one has time to read that much as a summary.

    3. Seth*

      LW1 is reminding me of a previous letter, where someone was tasked with summarizing their work into 1-2 slides in a presentation. Instead, that LW did it in 4, because otherwise how would she be able to communicate everything effectively?

  26. Nodramalama*

    Yes, plain language drafting for goverment is both expected and reasonable, and a very specific style of writing. I’m not surprised it’s being rewritten. One tip is that the more advanced word spell check has a function where it can tell you what age of reading your work is aimed at. Where I am you’re aiming for 12-14.

    1. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

      If this is going to the governor’s office, it’s as likely as not going to get incorporated into a speech, a press release, talking points for multiple officials.

      Even in academia, what you write for the peer-reviewed paper is not what you write for the poster session or the opening remarks to a panel discussion.

      Spoken English is just not the same as written English.

  27. Pink Geek*

    LW1 When you’re writing think about your audience. Communication has to take the goals, experience, and knowledge of who you are communicating with into account.

    I don’t love the “dumbing-down” language but it does sound like your boss needs you to add a new style to your writing tool box.

    One tool I love for simplifying language and grammar is hemingwayapp It’s not an AI and won’t make changes for you but it will identify places where you can edit or modify your word choices.

  28. Decidedly Me*

    LW4 – my manager’s number is in my phone and my SO knows how to gain access to my phone if needed. He also knows her name, so he could just call the company and ask for her, too. On my other side, I have direct contact information for HR at my SO’s company, which would be the best people to reach out to there.

    LW5 – I had a manager switch before I got a job once. I had gone through the interview process being told person A would be my boss. At the offer stage, it was explained that person B would be my boss instead and the reasoning for it. I really appreciated that heads up. It also helped that person B had been in a few of the interview rounds, so it was someone I already had exposure to. If the person covering your leave is already known, I highly recommend including them in the hiring process.

  29. Jenesis*

    LW#3, it’s worth noting that ODD, by definition as a diagnosis, does not exist past the age of 18. So there is no such thing as “work accommodations for ODD” (unless you are a type of business that employs high schoolers, I suppose).

    It’s possible that Mary may have been misdiagnosed (ADHD is especially comorbid with ODD, and woefully under-diagnosed in girls) and she will be able to obtain treatment through getting a second opinion. It’s additionally possible that after aging out of the high school environment, Mary will be able to straighten herself out and thrive in the workplace (with or without formal accommodations), especially if she can find work that allows her a high degree of flexibility, limited management oversight, and doesn’t require her to sit quietly in a chair all day.

    1. Queen esmeralda*

      My stepson was diagnosed with ODD by three different therapists. Thr teen years were godawful as he absolutely could not do anything he was told to do–everything had to be in the form of a choice, even if it wasn’t really a choice (set the table for dinner, or lose allowance for a month).

      He really struggled at work in the beginning, but managed to negotiate remote work long before Covid and he has really thrived without a manager around.

    2. HB*

      I second the potential misdiagnosis – or perhaps it was a correct diagnosis but ADHD was a comorbidity. My brother and I both had a really hard time engaging in classes where we just… weren’t that interested. And this could happen in classes where we were really interested in the topic, but we just didn’t mesh with the way the teacher wanted to teach the class. Combine that with some inability to regulate your emotions (was a much bigger problem for my brother – I had a much stronger instinct to people please) and it’s a nightmare for teachers who see potential and want to drag it out. I’m sure it was super frustrating for you, and I don’t want to say that leaving her alone was the “right” choice on an objective scale (because that feels like it could be dismissive), but it was probably the right one under the circumstances.

      You can force someone to attend school, but you can’t force them to stay in a job. Even if Mary still has the same issues that made the 504 plan necessary, the fact that she’ll have agency in the situation will have a huge impact. Hopefully she’ll self-select into a career that played to her strengths/interests and the issues won’t actually be a problem. If not, she’ll probably be pretty unhappy and could end up being one of those employees where people write in and say “Their work in these areas is great, but they’re terrible at this one thing and refuse to improve.” If the answer there ends up being a formal accommodation, it’s probably not going to look at all like the accommodation you saw because it’s going to come *from* Mary and it will either work (because Mary will try to figure out what she needs in order to do the thing that’s expected/required from her), or it won’t (because sometimes you can’t just make yourself want something even if you want to want it). In any case, everyone will have more options than you and Mary did in your class.

      1. Jenesis*

        There are so many options that open up for Mary once she hits 18!
        -If she can’t concentrate without physically moving around she can get a job working with her hands or in an office that allows fidget toys.
        -If she can’t concentrate without having music/other background noise playing, she can take online classes with her mic muted, then work at someplace that allows headphones.
        -If she has trouble focusing during the hours of 9am-3pm because her circadian rhythm is out of whack compared to the ‘typical’ population, she can take night classes and work a second shift job.
        -If she’s unable to care about learning because she’s being bullied at school or home she can move across the country and never see any of them again. (I sure wouldn’t want to do group projects if I hated all my classmates, either.)

        She was clearly intelligent and motivated enough to learn the material on her own time if she got a 4/5 on the AP exam, so I don’t doubt that she’ll be able to figure out something that works for her specific needs. I do wonder what grade she ended up getting in the class. Did she do any homework to make up for her 0 in-class participation?

        1. Dahlia*

          I’m taking classes an adult and I realize I mask so much less an adult (autism, not ADHD) than I did as a teen and I’m so grateful I am treated as an adult in my classes. Lately I’ve been working on small hand crafts during lectures – sewing, these days. I have a 98 in that class and I am one of the most engaged students.

          It’s wild how different the environments can be.

  30. Scribe*

    LW1, your boss needs to provide you with examples of the style and type of writing she wants. These examples need to include what’s good, what’s okay, and what’s bad, with notations and explanations as to why the writing examples in question as good, okay, or bad. She also needs to include examples and notes of how the ‘okay’ and ‘bad’ examples could be improved. This is the minimum she needs to be doing, or she is not setting you up for success.

    My whole job consists of translating complex language into plain English. But there is a significant amount of nuance to plain language that your manager may be missing, and I’m always concerned when things like this make their way into improvement plans. Especially if the manager in question isn’t doing the above as a basic step.

    1. Scribe*

      Also, your manager needs to provide you with guides (including editorial and other style guides) and tools that will help you.

    2. bamcheeks*

      I think whether the manager should be providing those or whether LW should be able to seek those out depends on the level they are at, to be honest. If their manager is also a communications professional, then yes, they absolutely should be able to provide guidance on this. But sometimes you are hired to be the expert at what you do in your organisation or team, and you are managed by someone who is NOT an expert, and it’s on you to set the standard and find your own best-practice models, whether that’s from other departments within the larger organisation or other organisations within the larger field.

      I do agree that LW absolutely needs to be looking at those models, however, whether it’s their own job to source them or their manager’s job to provide them.

      1. Cheery*

        Content professional here. The manager, who does not sound like either a subject matter expert nor a content professional, has put LW1 onto a PIP over this. I completely agree that she needs to provide what’s listed above as the absolute minimum of support. Otherwise, she has no idea what is actually needed (which based on the facts, I suspect is the case), and the PIP should be revoked.

        1. MsM*

          I’m not convinced the LW is a reliable narrator on this. If they think the supervisor is an idiot and there’s no need for them to make any changes whatsoever, it’s possible they’ve been provided with plenty of examples and ChatGPT is a desperate final suggestion since nothing else seems to be getting through.

        2. pocket microscope*

          Content professional here too. While I agree that she should be able to provide examples of acceptable style, I don’t think the notations, explanations etc. are necessary. People hire us on the grounds that we’re capable of doing this. If LW can’t work out how to change their customary style to suit the brief based on examples, then LW probably isn’t right for the role.

          And what happens after the PIP is revoked, in your scenario? LW keeps churning out unsuitable content and everyone else just puts up with it? Based on the letter, I’d bet my boots the manager is right about needing a different style.

    3. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

      It depends a bit on the exact role and the level of seniority.

      If the LW has a fairly senior position and it involves drafting documents for eg the state governor as a core task, I’m not sure the manager would expect this level of hand holding. If the LW is otherwise outstanding then maybe it’s worth it, but she might just want someone who can already do it, as it seems like a fairly core requirement of the job.

      I do think the language of “dumbing down” and using ChatGPT to redraft makes me wonder if the manager hasn’t quite explained the issue properly though.

      1. Cheery*

        Content professional here. The manager, who does not sound like either a subject matter expert nor a content professional, has put LW1 onto a PIP over this. I completely agree that she needs to provide what’s listed above as the absolute minimum of support. Otherwise, she has no idea what is actually needed (which based on the facts, I suspect is the case), and the PIP should be revoked.

        1. Nonsense*

          And how, exactly, do you know that the manager has no idea, besides your own biases?

          If the OP is writing in a clear, concise style, it doesn’t matter if the manager is a subject matter expert, does it? That’s the entire point of using clear, concise language – to tell nonexperts what they need to know.

          1. MsM*

            Also, as several people have pointed out, the audience for these communications (yes, including the governor) probably aren’t subject matter experts, either.

            1. pocket microscope*

              Right. The goal here is not for subject matter experts to sit around enjoying mutual back pats.

    4. Observer*

      LW1, your boss needs to provide you with examples…

      Which she may have done.

      But that’s not the issue here. The Le doesn’t need to hear what their manager needs to do. They need to understand that *they* need to change. Once that happens, they can have a conversation about the specifics.

      I mean that LW wants to write a *brief for the governor* in an academic voice and style! And are indignant and stunned that their manager wants to simplify the writing for the sake of clarity!

      What the LW needs to do is to go back to their boss and say *honestly* “I get it, but I need some guidance. ChatGPT is probably not the best way to do this. I’ll take some classes, but can you give me some examples of appropriately written documents of this sort, and perhaps even some bad ones. If you could mark them up so I can see what the issues are, that would be really helpful.”

      And then take the classes! And if their manager gives them the docs, absolutely look at them and figure out how to adopt that style and voice.

  31. Language Lover*

    lw #1

    I work with academics. One of them used to be a third-grade teacher, and since her rise up in academia was non-traditional, her style of writing is more straightforward than most academic writing and usually at a lower reading level (approximately high school/high school grad as opposed to college grad). She gets so many compliments about how easy her work is to read by her colleagues. They don’t even necessarily realize why that is. So even academics appreciate something easily digestable.

    It’s not dumbing down the writing to write in a style that is easily understood by a diverse readership. In fact, it’s hard to do and I wish I were better t it.

    1. Sharpie*

      LW1, Pink Geek and Language Lover both suggested that you think of it as adding a skill to your skillset, rather than losing something. To explain complicated ideas in simple language is a skill. It’s easy to use complicated language, especially when that’s the expectation and everyone around you is doing that, but to convey the same ideas in much simpler language takes skill. It reminds me of the YouTube series on explaining something to a child, to a beginner and then to an expert. (Look up ‘five levels of difficulty’ for examples, it’s a series on the Wired channel).

      You already have the knowledge that you want to share, you just have to find ways of explaining it for people who don’t necessarily have the academic background and wide vocabulary you do, or the time to parse complicated language even if they do have that background.

      As I say, it’s a skill, and a good one to have.

    2. amoeba*

      I also feel that you can have stylistically good, “beautiful”, but still plain writing (or ugly, bad complex writing!) Writing clearly doesn’t mean you literally just have to write in main clauses (“This is Bob. Bob is a lawyer. Bob goes to the office every day.”)

      You could pride yourself on, well, good style (avoiding long/convoluted sentences, unnecessary passive voice, unnecessary nominalisations…) instead of “big words”? Honestly, it’s much harder to do but does result in much nicer texts. Which, I promise, don’t read “dumb” at all.

      I wrote my science PhD thesis and then right after did an internship at a magazine. They taught me so much, which I now also try to incorporate into my academic writing – reading the thesis I wrote just before honestly makes me cringe now, haha!

  32. Sean*

    OP1,

    A B C: Accuracy, brevity, clarity.
    I’ve found that picking any two will usually result in the third taking care of itself.

  33. Strive to Excel*

    I’m reasonably sure my boss gets 400+ emails a day. If the reason the email is sent isn’t front and center in less than two sentences, he simply doesn’t have time to parse it.

    Business writing is the art of passive brevity.

  34. Craig*

    OP1, as a fellow academic, one thing I’ve found is that the cleverest people I’ve ever met have also been the clearest communicators. Remember that writing is for the benefit of the reader, not of the writer, so you’ve got to pitch your writing to the audience.

    For OP3, this may have been a time when a bit of translation for non-US readers would have been in order. Even with a quick Google search, I am not completely clear what an AP exam is or whether a 4 is good or bad in one. From context, I was assuming it was a bad grade. (Before anyone says it, I’m obviously aware that most readers of the site are in the US, but a significant number aren’t.)

    1. Silver Robin*

      AP = advanced placement. High school students can take these exams to get college credits, reducing the number of classes needed to complete a degree, or at least show they can perform well at a college level. Some high schools specifically offer AP classes which are intended to prepare for these tests, but you can take the test regardless.

      The tests are scored out of 5 and a 4 or 5 is generally what you need to get college credit. The student here actually did very well despite not engaging in class all year.

  35. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

    Good writing skills means an ability to flex for different audiences.

    The manager might be trying to flatter you by using the phrase “dumb it down” or might be just using a casual expression as shorthand. In fact this is nothing to do with audiences being dumb/smart/etc; it’s about writing *intelligently* which means tailored to your audience, making it descriptive and clear, using precise language, and understanding how your documents will be read or used.

    I do wonder if the framing of “dumbing down” is causing some confusion for the LW. In the past, I’ve been in communications/comms adjacent roles in a very technical bureaucratic organisation. It was as often my job to redraft or make others redraft when this happened.

    I found it frustrating when other colleagues used this framing, and it was not very effective. They were even worse, they used to talk about “imagine you’re explaining it to a six year old” which was unbelievably patronising and was designed to flatter the bad writer I suppose, but led the bad writer, understandably, to think “but surely this audience is smart/but they’re not a six-year-old/I’m a good writer and you’re asking me write badly.”

    (LW, I’m not saying you’re a bad writer, just the people I worked with.)

    And actually, what those people needed to hear was that their writing wasn’t good quality. (In these cases, honestly, it was terrible – full of acronyms, no full stops, all abstract language, no concrete words, no specifics, no examples, verbs they’d seemingly invented…).

    It isn’t always about writing everything in 100% plain English, but if you’re writing something for a governor or other policymakers, in my experience, (I write for policymakers all the time, but in the UK, so maybe it’s different), it needs to be much closer to plain English than not.

    I would assume your manager has told you a bit about why matters, but if not, that’s worth considering to help you understand what you need to do differently.

    Politicians and policymakers are not “dumb”, they are just very busy people, with varying degrees of pre-existing interest in, let alone knowledge of, your subject matter.

    Often their advisers/staff are the ones reading it at first, to decide whether the policymaker needs to bother reading it at all (in the UK, that might be some 20 year old intern or a recent grad).

    They’re receiving highly technical briefs, correspondence, reports etc on all sorts of detailed issues every day. They need key points, using concrete words (look up the difference between concrete words and abstract words if you don’t know what I mean), examples/case studies which they can really picture, facts and specifics on how it relates to their goals/stakeholders, and what you want from them.

    All that said, I can see why you object to the ChatGPT solution as I can imagine ChatGPT being inadequate for translating a document written for a policymaker into “plain English.” There’s so much nuance, so many things that are specific to your own organisation and the particular politics around that individual. But the best alternative is to get good at it yourself.

    TL;DR Don’t be tempted to think this is about you being too good at writing and you need to make your writing worse; this is actually about writing for difference audiences, a very important skill you can develop with practice.

  36. Irish Teacher.*

    LW1, it’s not that this is a new standard. It’s that it’s the standard for the job you are currently in. Different fields require different writing styles and part of having a good standard of written communication is being able to adapt to suit the field you are in and the audience you are writing for.

    I don’t know if your boss is trying to be tactful by referring to it as “dumbing down” or if she is prejudiced in favour of the type of language you currently use, but using a more informal tone and clearer, less collegiate English isn’t dumbing down or treating people as if they are stupid nor is it in any way a “less correct” form of English. It’s just different and more appropriate for the field you are currently in.

    I don’t necessarily think you are wrong to feel offended. Nobody likes to be told they are doing something wrong, especially something they previously prided themselves at doing well at and which probably feels basic to them. If you were previously expected to use more complex English, then writing for your current job probably seems like it should be easier and something you shouldn’t need correction on, but that isn’t true. Again, clearer, less formal English isn’t “easier”. It’s just a different style. And I know I tend towards the more formal at times and as a student teacher, I was told by one of my supervisors to speak less formally as I was teaching 12 and 13 year olds whose vocabulary was going to differ from that of an English teacher. So I do understand that it can be difficult. When you get used to speaking or writing in a particular style, it can be difficult to adapt.

    But I do think you need to take this seriously. I think in some ways you are misinterpreting what is going on. This isn’t about your boss being “threatened” by you and wanting you to “dumb down” so you don’t sound more intelligent than her. This is about you failing to write in the style necessary for the job and if you are on an Improvement Plan, then it’s likely that either your writing is falling well short of the standard or you are also struggling in other areas. That sounds very mean and I’m sorry. I am being very blunt because it sounds like you might not be really considering how serious this could be. You could lose your job if you fail to meet the standards of an Improvement Plan and it would be an awful pity if you lost your job over an issue you could have resolved, but didn’t because you thought your boss was being unreasonable. Which to be honest, even if she is, she has the power here. Even if your style is fine for the job and she just doesn’t like it, then she can probably fire you for writing in a style she doesn’t like, so it makes sense to use one she approves of or at least try your best to do so.

    LW5, I don’t think it’s that likely that many candidates will pull out of consideration if you tell them you will be going on maternity leave shortly after they start work. Yeah, it’s something extra to navigate in a new job but I don’t think it’s really something prohibitive, especially since they probably don’t know you and won’t be that invested in working with you personally.

    I think so long as you tell them that cover has been arranged and that it won’t negatively affect their on-boarding, it’s likely to be a lot less of an issue for them than it would be if they only found out after they started the job.

  37. bamcheeks*

    LW1, the thing that really hit me in your letter is that it’s all about your feelings and your relationship with your manager, and not about the actual work product: the writing!

    The no. 1 question here is: have you looked at the writing after your manager changed it, and is it better? That’s really all that matters. Have you looked at the writing after it’s been through the AI tool? Have you asked for samples of what your manager is looking for? Have you looked at how other people in your role or comparable roles write? Have you asked for a formal style guide, or a recommendation of which style guide the agency uses? Is it better? Can you see that it’s better? And if you can, can you learn to write like that?

    There are lots of people assuming that your boss is correct because academic writing is typically values precision for a small and highly-trained audience over accessibility and brevity. Whilst that’s certainly a possibility, it’s also possible that your boss is wrong about the writing and your writing is actually better than hers, or that your boss is right about the writing but bad at clarifying what she is looking for instead, or that the AI tool is not doing a good job of simplifying it. Without seeing samples of your work product, none of us can give you the “correct” answer. But to be honest, you shouldn’t need it: it is critical to success in your job that you learn to produce writing to the standard of best-practice models in your field, and that you can defend them on that basis. So that is what you should be doing: seek out best-practice models, and decide whether you can see a difference between your writing and the models.

    If you can, start teaching yourself to write like the best-practice models and gain a new skill. If you can’t, you need to be able to defend your writing with reference to best practice models from the field you are now in. Not just claiming that you are Good At Writing or generally Accessible, and being offended by any suggestion that you are not, but by using your skills as a communicator and a writer to understand what the standard is and show that you are using the same vocabulary, register, sentence structure, paragraph structure etc as the best-practice models. It’s your job to know that, and your job to be able to produce it and defend it.

    1. sparkle emoji*

      I think part of the issue is that LW may be judging writing on the wrong standards. The suggestion to look at industry style guides is a good one, but I don’t think it actually matters if LW thinks the style guides are better. They may be worse than LW’s writing in LW’s view, but LW is being told pretty clearly that their boss disagrees with their judgement. LW, even if you feel the style guides are worse than your writing, still try to follow them.

      1. bamcheeks*

        I think that’s true for this job, but I’m thinking about the longer term too. If they want to keep this job, LW absolutely needs to produce material in the register their manager requires, regardless of whether they feel it’s objectively worse writing, or successfully defend the register they are writing in.

        If they truly think the required standard is objectively worse writing, though, I would advise them to look for another job. Otherwise, they are going to be stuck in a situation where they are always working to someone else’s standards and can’t judge or evaluate their own work; they probably won’t be able to take pride in their work, and they probably won’t be able to progress because they won’t be able to get better at what they are doing or train others to do it. Obviously there are many people who get by in life doing what they perceive to be bullshit jobs with no real worth, but if you have other options, I’d pursue them.

  38. Yours Sincerely, Raymond Holt*

    If you have a loved one who smells, I think you should always tell them, even without job interviews.

    There’s a chart tool about this somewhere. Four categories:

    – Well intentioned and indirect (“How do you wash your clothes?”)
    – Well intentioned and direct (“Jim, this is awkward, but I’d hope you’d tell me if this was ever me. I’ve noticed you smell bad lately,” said in private.)
    – Negative intentions and direct (“Jim, you are disgusting, why do you smell so nasty don’t you wash, what’s wrong with you?” said in front of everyone)
    – Negative intentions and indirect (“Haha, have you noticed how Jim stinks? Eww, he’s gross, haha, smelly Jim.”)

    Surely most people would want the second one, if we smelled, or had spinach in our teeth, or whatever?

    PS my dad told me my breath smelled once and it turned out had a health issue that was easily fixed but could have got worse. So you never know! Say something!

  39. Redaktorin*

    So much handwringing about kids like Mary, but honestly? It’s just frustrating to be really smart.

    I also ignored my teachers before scoring high on each test. I was doing this because the teachers spent a lot of time going over stuff I already knew, and the combination of high IQ and ADHD made me too impatient to function in the school environment.

    These days I regard most of those teachers’ statements about how I’d never survive the working world as weird revenge fantasies from people who were in love with the sound of their own voices and couldn’t cope when I didn’t feel the same way. I’m earning about three or four times what they did, adjusted for inflation, in a job that doesn’t cause me to fight with children, so I’m pretty sure I’m doing fine.

    Just don’t ask me how it feels to parent a tween who is exactly like me.

    1. Cat Tree*

      Just to be very clear – most really smart people *don’t* have ODD.

      Also I don’t think that most kids with ODD necessarily go on to make huge amounts of money.

      1. Redaktorin*

        Sure, but the ones who ignore you all year and get a good score on the AP test anyway will probably be fine—and may not actually have ODD.

    2. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Those teachers probably assume that anyone who doesn’t get on with teachers or classmates will do poorly at work, when it is usually important to get along – brilliant jerks are going out of fashion.

      However, the 2 environments are quite different and some jobs are without the petty rules, aggravations and micromanagement of school (and some are not!)
      Also, the additional few years maturity between high school and a post-uni job often mean that the young person develops much better coping and social skills.

      So, it depends on whether the student has the aptitude, exam results, home backup – and maybe luck – that allow them to choose a job that fits.

      1. Abigail*

        Maturity also brings the perspective that rules you thought were arbitrary as a child had a purpose you couldn’t see at the time.

        You are correct that brilliant jerks are going out of fashion. This is for a very good reason.

        1. fhqwhgads*

          Maturity also often brings the perspective that rules you were told had a purpose were either actually arbitrary, or in no way had the effect they purported to. It’s both. A bunch of stuff that seemed arbitrary wasn’t. A lot of it was. And a lot of stuff that wasn’t supposed to be arbitrary, totally was.

      2. Falling Diphthong*

        They are such different environments. High schools can’t just say “You’re disruptive; leave.” Students can’t just say “I’m bored. If I can bang out any score higher than 85% without sitting in this class, you should let me do that.”

        It’s why shows like Buffy and Veronica Mars were set in high school and struggled when they transitioned to college–because if you’re over 18, you can just say “Living on the Hellmouth is a bad decision, and I will be moving to somewhere I don’t risk getting eaten by a fish person.” So audiences wonder why you don’t just do that.

    3. Dinwar*

      Same here! I had a lot of teachers tell my parents I’d never amount to anything because I couldn’t focus, couldn’t get along with kids in class, etc. Turns out I was just bored out of my mind and the teachers were objectively horrible. Once I got out of that situation I thrived, in school and in my career.

      There have been a LOT of studies showing that the USA education system is doing a gross disservice to gifted students bordering on criminal negligence (I got a good understanding of this while my wife did her Masters in gifted education). Basically, because the laws have historically focused on the lower-performing students, teachers have been trained to ignore high-performing students and minimize the “disruptions” they cause. The idea was that high-performing students will essentially take care of themselves. It’s no wonder gifted kids are often labeled ODD, ADD, ADHD, etc. It’s a trauma response.

      1. Abigail*

        A lot of this depends on where you live and the resources available to you.

        It is very difficult to discuss education as a monolith in the United States when so much is determined by states and local school boards.

        The plight of the smart kids is not a universal experience.

        1. Dinwar*

          “A lot of this depends on where you live and the resources available to you.”

          This comment demonstrates the sort of callous disregard for gifted students that keeps change from happening. Replace “gifted” with literally any other special needs category and you’ll see how absurd your argument is–variance does not negate the existence of systemic flaws in a system. But because these are smart kids they don’t deserve such consideration, I suppose.

          The reality is that gifted and high-achieving students are special needs student, just the same as low-achieving students or students with disabilities. Most education is geared toward the median student, for reasons that make sense and are valid. “No Child Left Behind” and a few other laws intentionally and systematically geared education towards the lower end of the ability spectrum. And that’s not necessarily wrong–obviously we should help those students. But it left kids on the other end of the ability spectrum without advocates, without resources, and in a situation that is legitimately mentally traumatizing. And this has measurable detrimental effects on their mental health and long-term success.

          If this were literally any other group this would be so obvious that no one would question it (thus the exercise in my first paragraph). That these children (and I will remind you, we are discussing children) are gifted/high achieving doesn’t make callous disregard for systemic injustice okay.

          1. Minimal Pear*

            As a “former gifted kid” who is also disabled, you’re so right! They actually say much worse things about disabled children. “Gifted child” is in and of itself not an oppressed class (except for the fact that they’re children), although I will happily admit that there’s a strong intersection with disability.

          2. The Unspeakable Queen Lisa*

            There you go being rude again. Stop insulting people who respond to you.

            “A lot of this depends on where you live and the resources available to you” is a statement of fact, not a callous disregard for anyone. You only have your own limited experiences, and it’s “absurd” for you to act like you’re the authority on someone else’s lived experience.

            I attended high school in 2 different states – in 1 state, the “advanced” science textbook was the same as what had been the “regular” science textbook in the other. That is just one example.

            I think our education system fails everyone in one way or another. It is also true that sometimes smart kids are expected to take care of themselves. This is not because we all hate smart kids and want them to suffer, but that there aren’t enough resources, so of course the teachers are going to focus on making sure nobody fails the grade. It’s like Maslow’s hierarchy, education edition.

            Two things can be true at once. You really struggle with false binaries and black and white thinking, but please stop attacking people. We’re all good people doing our best.

          3. Joron Twiner*

            Gifted kids are often underserved, but it’s pretty obvious why teachers focus their limited time and resources on kids who still don’t understand the material.

            Equating “won’t someone think of the smart kids” with mental and physical disabilities and calling it “systemic injustice” is… certainly a take.

      2. Hyaline*

        I mean, the US system starts on the premise that everyone is equally capable of every academic task set before them and then institutes standardized tests to monitor that concept and it’s no wonder that kids on both end of the spectrum end up floundering in a cookie cutter system. The difference is that we decided we have to catch the struggling kids up, but since the high-achieving kids are meeting the bar, who cares? Yes, can you tell I’m frustrated by my own experiences and on behalf of my own kids?

      3. fhqwhgads*

        Well, no these are separate things. Getting labeled ODD due to having a trauma response is extremely common. Gifted kids who experienced trauma are common, but that’s because trauma is common. High-performing kids taking care of themselves isn’t trauma – hell I went to schools for gifted kids and yeah that’s how it was too, but it does twist your mind for what “school” is supposed to be. I was in college before I understood the concept of “the class is there to teach you the subject, not just evaluate what you know”.

      4. nnn*

        “It’s no wonder gifted kids are often labeled ODD, ADD, ADHD, etc. It’s a trauma response.”

        This is flagrantly false. Gifted kids are not “often” labeled ODD, nor are they at all more likely to have trauma histories.

    4. RIP Pillowfort*

      Honestly- I have ADHD and I wonder how I would have been labeled if I wasn’t so passive about dealing with difficult situations?

      I mean in school I was quiet and wanted to keep to myself to the point I despised group work. I struggled to focus on work in class because it was so disruptive. But I didn’t make a fuss so I wasn’t a “problem” but they didn’t like how I didn’t conform to whatever “normal” was.

      There were several teachers who thought I was the worst student even when I was excelling academically. I just didn’t fit into their mindset of a good student and they were really judgmental about it.

      1. Eldritch Office Worker*

        I was passive to the point of just not going to school, a lot, because it was a frustrating waste of my time. Despite missing a lot of school, I was always on the honor roll, and teachers were awful to me about it.

        Wonder why I have so many anxiety diagnoses as an adult.

  40. EventPlannerGal*

    OP1 – You should have a think about the actual function of the writing you’re doing. When it comes to something like a brief for a governor, the clue is in the name. This is probably a very busy person who is being handed a ton of information about all kinds of things, all the time. Clarity and brevity are absolutely key. Being able to adapt your writing style to match the context that you’re working in isn’t insulting, it’s a really useful skill. Your manager’s framing of ‘dumbing down’ isn’t very helpful, but I’d guess she’s trying to soften the request.

    Personally I think you should have that think pretty quickly, as you’ve kind of skimmed over the fact that you’re on a formal PIP and I’m not sure you’re focusing on the right thing here. At this point the request for you to change your writing style isn’t a matter of debate, it’s something that you *need* to do or your job is going to be in danger. It doesn’t really matter if you find it insulting – which, again, it really isn’t – when it’s evidently part of the job that you’re being paid to do.

  41. Jake Purralta*

    When I had an accident and was taken to hospital, I had a bad concussion an apparently while still not with it just kept asking people to contact my work. In the end the police went to the office and let them know and my Mum and Partner both called the office. They had to call the main number as I lost all my contacts in my phone as my phone smashed.
    Now my partner and I have the contact details for each others Managers and also know each others passcodes so we could access their contacts is needed.

  42. Redaktorin*

    LW1, others have covered the fact that your “collegiate” writing is likely not as strong as you think it is, so let me just say, you are coming across as one of those people who had to leave academia to make a passable living, feels very insecure about it, and heaps scorn upon everybody without a terminal degree as a way of dealing with that insecurity.

    If you ever want to get off that PIP, you’re going to have to stop looking for ways to call your boss stupid.

  43. Sweet as Apple Pie*

    LW1 – This is really about your boss telling you to do something and you refusing to do it. I can’t tell if your quote marks are sarcastic or not, but you’re really on an improvement plan, then you’re on very thin ice indeed.

    Change the issue of writing to something else. If your boss said you need to call people on the phone and you insisted on sending emails because you thought it was better, and then she set an improvement plan that clearly states you need to make phone calls or else, and you are still insisting that emails are better because that’s how you did it at university… Well, would you want someone like that working for you?

    I’m honestly not trying to attack you because I do, in fact, relate a bit to what you’re saying. But you’re being paid to do a job, and you need to do it while you still have one.

    1. Paint N Drip*

      I really don’t know of OP1 understands the gravity of the improvement plan – you need to change NOW, OP!

      1. Sweet as Apple Pie*

        Yeah, that’s the part that really stood out to me. I don’t blame the LW for not wanting to use those so-called AI programmes as I wouldn’t either. But they don’t need them to do what they’re being asked to do. It won’t hurt to consider why the request bothers them so much as well, to the point they were put on PIP. Hope you can turn it around, LW!

  44. Tired Librarian*

    LW4 – My spouse had a colleague last year who was involved in a serious accident, along with their partner. Family members then ended up reaching out via LinkedIn as they didn’t have any specific work contacts. Not ideal, but eventually got the right people connected for ongoing updates.

    In that case I can understand why there was confusion, but I admit I find it difficult to imagine not being able to make contact on behalf of a partner! My spouse and I could both easily get in touch with each other’s managers if necessary. I once had a direct report’s husband get in touch with me when she had major flight issues getting back home and wasn’t able to make contact herself (he contacted the main library number, but knew who to ask for).

    1. Sara without an H*

      +1. One of my reports had a sudden medical emergency and had to be hospitalized. Her husband called me at work. We’d met at the annual holiday party, so he knew my name and I knew his. I certainly didn’t consider it “overkill” and I was glad that he was able to contact me.

      On another occasion, I was the one who went to the hospital. My brother finally called the campus information number, got them to transfer him to somebody in the library, and was able to let my staff know that I wouldn’t be in for a while. But ours was a very small campus and tracking someone down was a simple procedure. Trying to do this in a large corporate or educational organization could be much more complicated.

      Short version: Have a workplace emergency contact (either your direct manager or HR) and include that information on your list of emergency numbers and leave a copy where your friends or family members can easily find it.

    2. Nola*

      Yeah, I don’t think it’s “overkill” to have some really basic information about your spouse easily available. One or two lines/phone numbers.

  45. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    #1 I can only do by what the OP sent, but I found her letter longwinded and unduly convoluted. I’m not surprised she is on a PIP if she has kept refusing her manager’s instructions to change her writing level.

    I’m a STEM PhD retired from engineering R&D and her style of writing would also have been considered very inappropriate in all my former workplaces. We required clarity and brevity.

    The purpose of writing should be to communicate information, not to try to show how clever you are.

    Am I off-base to be offended? YES
    Is academia-level written communication out of touch? YES

    I recommend you swallow your pride and write in the style your manager wants, because that PIP is a clear sign that you will likely be fired if you continue to push back.
    Also, you sound contemptuous of your manager – I hope that’s well hidden when you are at work.

    1. Falling Diphthong*

      In the 90s, spouse returned to his alma mater for a panel on “Here are recent PhD graduates who went into different fields, ask them questions.” A major theme that emerged was “So it turns out you are going to have to communicate with people outside your immediate research group of 5 or so experts, to explain what you have done or want to do, and we could really use some training in that.”

      In the 10s, oldest’s undergraduate science program required everyone to come up with three different elevator pitches to explain their research, geared to different levels.

    2. Hyaline*

      Yeah, the communication style/writing advice is almost a red herring here–the real problem is the relationship LW has with her workplace. Either the boss actually is intimidated and a problem, or as you say, LW is contemptuous of the boss. Neither of these is good (and I have my bets on which one is the reality), but in either case LW is still on a PIP, and needs to follow the guidelines for improvement or be fired.

  46. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

    #1 Refusing to change your writing style is like refusing to change your formal suit, designer bag & shoes for more downmarket casual clothes when the dress code is intended to be approachable to vulnerable clients. OP1 is breaking the writing code.

  47. Apex Mountain*

    For #1, if you’re on a “formal improvement plan”, I think you have no choice but to make your peace with it or start the job search.

  48. Anon. Scientist*

    #2 Agree that it’s easier to blame laundry when it might be a combination. I went through a stinky period (would come home and spouse would say, rough day, huh, with an arched eyebrow) a while back. Several things combined helped:

    1. I switched to a deodorant with more aluminum
    2. I was wearing undershirts under my sweaters/blouses and it made things worse because the armpits bunched up and things got kind of hot and manky. I switched to camisoles/tank tops.
    3. unnatural fabrics are notorious for holding smells after being washed. I’ve gradually replaced my tops with at least higher blends of cotton.
    4. We had a high efficiency washer – I used the suggestions noted above (less detergent, white vinegar, let it air out)
    5. I give every top an armpit sniff test before wearing. If it has even a faint odor, it’ll be way worse later. If it doesn’t improve after another wash or 2 without wearing, it’s terminally stinky and I recycle.

    1. Eldritch Office Worker*

      “I switched to a deodorant with more aluminum”

      I want to highlight this because aluminum-free deodorant is very trendy right now and it’s not doing any favors for people who have strong body odor. ‘Natural’ products are often just marketing and aren’t necessarily healthier, better for the environment or your body, or good at doing the task they are designed to do.

      1. LJ*

        re: “trendy” – I don’t know how legit the claim is, but I remember hearing 20+ years ago that antiperspirant (like the ones with aluminum) was bad for you because it prevents perspiration. So if it is just a trend, it’s certainly not a novel one

        1. LJ*

          To be clear, at least with the definitions I’m working with:
          deodorant = doesn’t stop perspiration, doesn’t contain aluminum
          antiperspirant = has aluminum in order to stop perspiration (not sure if there are non-aluminum ones to achieve that)

    2. Zahra*

      Sometimes, you get a build-up of deodorant and/or sweat stains. I’ve had a period when all my clothes smelled bad. I had to soak them all, multiple times, in baking soda (vinegar wasn’t doing much in that specific case). The color of the water after soaking the first time for 15-20 minutes… was very unappealing. Since then, I add baking soda as a pre-wash soak and/or vinegar as fabric softener (it doesn’t smell after rinsing) to all my laundry. Plus stain treatment if I start to see any build up. I don’t want to spend another day beside the bathtub soaking all my clothes!!!

  49. raspberrysorbet*

    LW1: may I recommend having a look at the GOV.UK style guide/writing guidance? This is a good place to begin: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/content-design/writing-for-gov-uk

    The aim on GOV.UK is to create content which is “clear, concise and correct” to allow people to get things done. Sometimes people feel that content for technical/specialist audiences needs to use more complex language, and occasionally that’s true (if needed to be clear and correct!) but most of the time ALL audiences just want to get the necessary information from your writing as quickly and easily as possible. Especially busy/stressed/important people like elected officials. So GOV.UK content designers focus on the task that someone is trying to complete when they read something. Could this idea apply to some of your writing? Especially policy documents, perhaps?

    There will be an accepted style and format for writing things like policy or legal documents – are your documents in line with those produced by others in similar roles or by your predecessors?

    You may be writing extremely well in the context of outlining a complex argument, presenting evidence or sources and exploring every possible detail relevant to your expertise, but that wouldn’t be appropriate in many other types of writing.

    I get that it’s probably really frustrating to feel you are writing ‘well’ in the way you are used to and being told it’s not what’s needed. But there can be a real sense of achievement and satisfaction in writing something as simply as possible while still including all the important details or requirements, and knowing that your work will mean other people can get things done or understand things they need to know. It takes just as much craft to do this as to write detailed academic papers.

  50. Policy Wonk*

    OP1 – I get this a lot in my work for the government from academics who work for me or people who just finished graduate school. I ask for a one-pager summarizing an issue and I get a three page product. Often I have to tell people not to use the passive voice, to use more direct language, that it is fine to largely copy what we have been saying on this topic – you don’t need to be original, etc.. This is not literally “dumbing down” the paper – the issues discussed are often complex – it’s a different writing style. All these employees are great writers, they are just used to writing for a different audience and need to make a transition to our style. Please take the suggestions on board.

    OP4 – My spouse has, in a prominent location, the name/contact info for my boss’ admin. I travel a lot for business so this can be used if spouse has trouble contacting me in a personal emergency, or in the example you describe. If spouse really needs to talk to my boss the admin can connect them, but usually the admin would be sufficient (and would actually do something with the info provided).

    1. A New Day of Anon*

      You understand the elements of plain language writing well enough to articulate them, but I wonder if OP1’s manager does? I’ve seen teams managed by people who have limited experience writing outside of grad school or research settings. In some cases, these managers don’t have much exposure to the intended audiences for some of the written materials their team produces. These folks can easily flag writing that’s full of jargon or is too wordy, but they often advise writers to do all the borrowed-from-academia no-nos you mentioned. This kind of direction leads to “dumbed down” writing that’s sometimes brief but seldom clear when discussing complex issues.

      If that’s what’s happening, I can see where OP’s contempt and frustration is coming from. They absolutely need to adjust their writing style but they may be getting feedback that makes their work worse in new ways.

  51. Justin*

    As someone with a doctorate who is also a published author outside of academia, I try to be as plain spoken as possible for a more general K12 teacher audience or my colleagues.

    And I still sometimes have to switch up my vocab!

    Academic language is sometimes barely English, which doesn’t help everyone access the research even if they can get their hands on it (and we wonder why people misunderstand correlation/causation etc). Down with academic language, lol.

    But yeah, switch it up.

  52. Safely Retired*

    LW4 – My first thought about a spouse having the boss’s contact information was that it depends on the spouse. Those married (or otherwise closely linked to) what might be called a nut job may need to think twice about that. It could be career limiting to have someone take it upon themself to give one’s superior a piece of their mind.

    2. Red Reader the Adulting Fairy*

      Yeah, I was thinking that if I didn’t trust my spouse to have access to my boss’s contact information and only use it if absolutely necessary and appropriate, I probably should be reconsidering my choice of spouse.

  53. ODD SIL*

    My brother-in-law has ODD. He is 38.
    School was challenging for him, he didn’t graduate high school and eventually went back for his GED.
    He has his CDL (commercial driving license) and drives a box truck doing deliveries for a local business. He would be very unhappy in a traditional office environment, but he thrives in a role with clear expectations and minimal oversight.
    He also was in the navy reserves for 10 years, and speaks fondly of his time there.

    He had a lot of teachers in high school who doubled down on “because I said so” instead of explaining why they were asking him to do something, which drove him crazy. He’s left jobs quickly before because “the boss was an idiot”, which I’ve understood to mean “boss wouldn’t explain their thinking or wasn’t open to feedback”.

    I can only speak on my brother-in-law’s experience, but there are lots of ways to be “successful”, and someone with ODD might define a “good” job very differently than their peers.

    1. Eldritch Office Worker*

      It’s so interesting to me how many people with ODD or similar diagnoses thrive in military environments

      1. Jenesis*

        Same! I wonder why that is. I’ve never served or knew anyone who did, but it seems to me like the military would be the epitome of having to do random bullshit tasks (“Give me 100 push-ups, private!”) for no greater justification than “because I said so”.

        Maybe it’s different because you have to actively choose to sign up for it and there are clear consequences (i.e. getting discharged without pay and benefits) if you refuse orders?

        1. Eldritch Office Worker*

          The consequences are probably a piece of it. I think a lot of people who are oppositional inherently crave structure, they just need that structure to make sense. The “because I said so” of the military is reinforcing the need to follow orders because in a real situation, you need to follow orders without question and it needs to be second nature or things could go very badly. It’s probably easier to get buy-in when you’re looking at stakes, either real ones like getting discharged or hypothetical ones that you’re being trained to avoid.

  54. SeeReeves*

    Former journalist who worked in academia and is married to a PhD. I hate academic-ese. I spent all of my graduate program yelling “just speak English!” into the void. I had to stop copying editing my husband’s work because it made me so angry (and reached a point where I could not figure out what was being said). My Facebook memories just reminded me of this sentence from a graduate program reading:

    “An important strand of multiple stakeholder and welfare mix arguments (indeed social movement theory more generally) focuses on the dynamic sense in which voluntary organizations inhabit a ‘tension field’ in which potentially synergetic discourses are undertaken and potentially productive new opinions, ideologies and expectations are generated.”

    What?

    To the LW. If your job is to communicate and you’re being told you’re not successfully doing that, it’s important that you take the feedback to heart and adjust accordingly. For most public communication, it should be at an 8th grade reading level (or lower). The Hemingway app used to be a great tool to see what grade level a piece is.

  55. el l*

    OP1:
    Actions speak louder than words.

    The first action worth noting is that your boss has put you on a PIP to improve your writing, meaning that if you do not you’ll be fired.

    The second action is them putting a high-stakes document of yours thru AI, presumably because they need clearer writing fast. Also suspect that they’re doing specifically this because the traditional redline with your language has proven to be a waste of time. Because you’re defiant.

    In academia, you generally write to show you understand to a specialist all the ways in which it’s complicated.

    In the real world, you write to make things happen – or to inform a busy nonspecialist like a governor on what they need to know to make a good decision. And real world is not dumber – it’s harder. Because it matters more.

    Your perception is not reality. You are not clear enough for this role. And if you can’t fix it soon, you’ll get fired.

  56. Trade*

    Sharing manager contact with your spouse/emergency contact person should definitely be done. I remember growing up (1970s) that my mother had to contact my father’s manager (office job in big company) when father was very ill and in the hospital.

  58. Retired Mostly*

    LW4, also a good idea for the employer to have emergency contact info for their employees. As a small business owner, I asked all of my employees to give me a phone number of who I should call if they unexpectedly did not show up for work. This was triggered by a local incident where a white collar worker did not come home from work one day. Turns out he drove off the road into a deep ditch on the way in to work that morning, and no one started looking for him till that evening. We sealed the info in an envelope to be used only for such emergencies.

    1. Mad Scientist*

      Yep, super important for employers to have emergency contact info as well as the other way around. I had a roommate who went MIA once. We hadn’t seen her in several days but assumed she was still going to work, maybe just staying over at someone else’s place post-hookup, who knows. Then we got a call from her boss asking if we knew what happened to her or if she was okay because she hasn’t shown up to work in a week. Turned out she was going through a health crisis and we wouldn’t have known otherwise.

    2. OP4*

      Yes, my work already has my husband as my emergency contact! I was wondering if what typically happens is that if I don’t show up, the first step is to get in touch with my emergency contact.

      1. Anne of Green Gables*

        We collect emergency contact information from employees in my department, and have rules/guidelines around when we use it. We don’t want staff to think we use it willy-nilly. And only 2 people have access to where it is kept, although 2 more could probably get access in a pinch.

  59. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    2. Telling someone they smell bad is a conversation practically everyone dreads but I agree with Alison in that it would be best to say something now instead of having him find out somewhere down the line and come back with ‘you KNEW and said nothing?!’ which from experience can lead to far more bitter feelings.

    In the deepest depths of depression I’d go without hygiene for weeks and thought nobody noticed because nobody said anything. The fact that nobody wanted to be around me was just proof that I was worthless. I must have reeked to high heaven because finally it was actually a manager (not mine though) who took me aside and said ‘I don’t know if it’s your clothes, hair, teeth or just all over but can you clean all of these sometime? There’s a bit of a whiff around you’.

  60. Blue Pen*

    OP 1 — I think your letter demonstrates why simple, clear, accessible writing is a skill. And without dismissing your strengths in academic writing, it’s generally easier to “hide” behind the big words and complex sentence structures.

    As Alison said, your boss isn’t accusing other people of being dumb. But she wants you to appreciate that to get them to understand your organization’s key ideas, you can’t present them with a tome of a case study and expect them to respond favorably. Most people (especially those outside academia) don’t want to read writing like that, and they’re not interested in investing so much of their time to parse through what it is you’re trying to say. The first thing you should learn as a writer is to respect your audience. If they’re not picking up what you’re putting down, the fault is not with them.

    I can’t link to it here, but a tool (or at least as an exercise to get you more familiar with this way of writing) I would recommend is the Hemingway Editor. It should come up as soon as you Google for it.

  61. Dinwar*

    “For what it’s worth, though, ODD is a controversial diagnosis and is often criticized as pathologizing normal child/adolescent behavior and/or trauma responses.”

    It can also be a nearly debilitating psychological disorder that makes life extremely difficult for the person and everyone around them. I won’t say it’s not over-diagnosed, but I’ve known people who have it (along with ADHD, seems to go together at least in the cases I’ve seen) and it’s very real and can be very, very scary.

    Most of the ones I know end up medicated and able to mostly live normal lives. They’re still extremely hot-tempered and have the patience of a rabid wolverine with a sore tooth, but at least they recognize it and are able to learn to manage it. As others have said, they typically end up in jobs where having a strong independent streak is normal or beneficial. I know one that’s a fire fighter, for example. They all have the attitude “I don’t care what anyone says, I’m going to do the job”, so he fits in pretty well.

    1. peter b*

      The controversial part of the diagnosis is not that the symptoms and experiences of those diagnosed with it aren’t legitimate/real, but that those experiences could often be better described in terms of trauma-responses. The diagnosis also disproportionately impacts boys and Black children, so it can be argued that in some or many cases, “ODD” is a diagnosis that specifically stigmatizes the behavior of Black children who would be better served by being treated for e.g. ADHD, PTSD, or other disorders that their white peers are more likely to receive for the same behaviors.

  62. Keymaster of Gozer (she/her)*

    3. I’ve got a LOT wrong with my brain and sometimes that can lead to being really unpleasant and a real stubborn ‘I’m not going to do what you tell me to’ streak. I’d rather not relate my time at school as that was in the 80s and there were very few accomodations for anything.

    I nearly DID do myself out of a career when I let my brain worms run untrammeled at work. As my boss pointed out to me that there was nothing I could possibly say that would allow me to get way with the kind of behaviour I was showing. There’s no accomodation that says you can be hostile.

    But I’ve flourished in my chosen career of IT with relatively few accomodations for the brain issues (the physical ones are another matter entirely). Computers don’t care about whether or not you have a resistant personality – they’ll yell error messages at you anyway. And that, I found, suited me a lot better.

  63. Former Prof*

    As a former Extension Professor, I understand how academic writing can be intimidating for most people. When I wrote my publications for the general public, I aimed for high school literacy or even lower. I always checked my writing on MS Word’s option to check grade level. If the writing was too advanced, I would simplify. The ability to translate complex information into simpler statements is a skill which can be developed.

  64. Tuesday Tacos*

    The first letter brings to mind the police press conferences where the cops always try to use big official sounding language and sound really awkward “we apprehended the perpetrator blah blah blah” when they could just say we caught the suspect.

    1. Never the Twain*

      Here in the UK it’s railway station and on-train announcers that are most noticeably guilty of that. On a train from London airport (where up to 50% of the passengers may be non-native speakers) you might get an announcement like ‘Customers are advised to take precautions on disembarking the train on arrival as the current inclement weather may have rendered the platform slippery.’
      I really think the railways are the only environment left where you will hear the word ‘inclement’, but it’s used on pretty well a daily basis there.

      1. londonedit*

        The one that drives me absolutely mad is the announcement on the new Elizabeth Line trains at Paddington and Heathrow – ‘For the safety and convenience of passengers with heavy luggage, please use the lifts provided’. Which makes it sound like everyone *without* heavy luggage should use the lifts, for the convenience of the people *with* heavy luggage. At some point I will get round to writing to TfL about it, because I have become that person. And it isn’t clear!

  65. Ex-Prof*

    #2 It might also be less awkward to frame it as job interview (and later job) prep– Dude, if you want the job, make sure you shower right before the interview, top to toe, and use deodorant.

  66. hi*

    For someone who prides themselves in communication, LW1 apparently doesn’t understand the communication strategy for their current position. Why are you so offended that your manager mentions that you need to change the way you’re writing things?

  67. Mad Scientist*

    LW4: It definitely isn’t overkill to share emergency contact info with your spouse, or your roommate, or any other trusted person who would likely know if something happened to you (even a neighbor if that’s your best option).

    I recently had a personal emergency where I could not use my cell phone or work computer to contact my boss and let him know that I’d have to miss a couple days of work, including a meeting with him that same morning. I did have a list of emergency contacts written down in my desk for situations like this (including my boss, doctor, therapist, etc… basically anyone I might have an appointment with who would need to be notified if I was going to miss that appointment). BUT of course I hadn’t updated the list when I got a new supervisor, so the person I had written down as my boss no longer worked for my company. I ended up finding a way to contact my boss anyway, but after this incident I made sure to update everything on that list because it’s where my spouse would go for contact info if something happened to me.

    But even if you don’t do something like this, your employer most likely has an emergency contact on file for you from when you started the job (which also could be out of date, but I digress). So if you don’t show up to work for a couple days, that’s who they would contact, and family members might not need to contact your boss on your behalf at all in that case. Years ago, my partner and I had a roommate we didn’t know very well, and since she didn’t have family in the area, she listed us as her emergency contact for work. We did get a call once after she didn’t show up to work for an entire week and they were genuinely worried about her (we were worried too at that point). Unfortunately she hadn’t been home during that time either, so we couldn’t help or explain the absence, but it did alert us that something was going on so we could try to contact her family even if they didn’t live nearby. (Don’t worry, she’s OK now.)

  68. Fluffy Fish*

    OP1 – I am a government communicator and yes your writing is absolutely inappropriate for the job. Everything we do is supposed to be plain language and accessible to the public. It doesn’t matter if you are only writing internal documents – those are public record and available to the public. You really need to look at what the public literacy level is.

    You also need to take some courses asap on plain language and accessible language. I can tell by what you wrote that your idea of accessible is not what we communicators mean by accessible.

    Aim for at minimum an 8th grade level. I personally try to hit 5th grade.

    Bottom line you are in the wrong here.

  69. Hyaline*

    LW1, first–not all academics write in dense or incomprehensible language, but you can see that the stereotype is strong here! Honestly, whether or not LW writes in an appropriate way for the audience and purpose is not really the issue here, is it? They said that their boss is “intimated” by them and adds that they’re on a PIP, of which the writing is only one element. One of two things is true here–either their boss actually is intimidated by them and is punishing them for being smart/capable/from an academic background/combo of the above, and that is a toxic and horrible situation and LW should run. Or, LW is assuming there’s no POSSIBLE way that their own shortcomings could be true, and are blaming any attempt at correction or improvement on the boss being “intimidated.” If that’s the case, they’re in for a long haul of difficult employment situations until they can learn to accept correction.

    LW, you really need to step back and reflect, and not only about your written communication style. Whether you should use AI to change your language use is a red herring here.

  70. Hawk*

    I just want to add a tool suggestion for OP1 and anyone else struggling with being verbose: there is an online application called Hemingway Editor that can help you clarify your writing. It doesn’t use AI. It rates your writing to different reading levels and highlights the different parts. I use it at work occasionally as I have a lot of coworkers who speak English as a second or third language and I’m often verbose.

    OP4, that happened with a former manager of mine (similar story, too). After hearing that, I made sure my spouse had my work phone numbers. But now that I think about it, I’m not sure if we have them anywhere else. I’ll make sure to put a card in my purse or on the fridge with my work call-out number just in case (my manager is hard to reach and I’ve had a lot of managers change in the last decade at my work).

  71. trust me, i read a book once.*

    to the linguist – the purpose of communication is to make clear the information you are trying to provide to the audience. not make yourself look smart. that’s a common mistake by people who are insecure about their intelligence. it’s better to demonstrate your intelligence by communicating effectively and using your ideas to impress, not the obscurity of your vocabulary.

  72. Never the Twain*

    #1 – I (newly out of academia) once started a report ‘Of the 728 test cases defined, 11 have failed out of the 97% we have run.’
    My then boss, who had had among other things a stint in journalism, rewrote it to say ‘All of the testcases have passed, with the exception of a very few which remain to be run or are pending retesting.’
    As he explained to me, I had got across the essential information in a precise and unambiguouds way, but the audience wanted to hear ‘hooray’ things. If they hear ‘All of the test cases have passed’ the sound of backslapping will drown out the bit about the ones that didn’t pass – sorry, were waiting test or retest. And then, ’11’, no matter out of how many, just sounds worse than the vaguely hand-waving ‘very few’, even though that includes a further 20-odd cases.
    This of course was for a customer report, and an internal project team wouldn’t have worn it for a second, but horses for courses.

  73. everybodys_different*

    LW5 – Your choice of when and how much to share may help shape or reflect the work culture in your office. It’s your choice when to disclose your pregnancy. I was once hired to a remote position where the director gave three weeks notice that she was pregnant and going on maternity leave. The one person who knew sooner was the staff member stepping in to supervise during leave. I was a new hire at the time, and would have appreciated knowing during the hiring process. In hindsight, it was indicative of the office culture (that nobody communicates well or shares personal information, we were team of silos not working very well together), and I ultimately left because I wanted a different office culture.

  74. JTP*

    LW1, the average American reads at a 6th grade level. If you are writing for the government, you REALLY need to take your boss seriously.

  75. Crencestre*

    OP1: It’s very likely that your manager wants you to write in a more informal, conversational style but that she phrased it poorly by talking about “dumbing it down.” A conversational writing style needn’t be dumb at all, but it does need to be accessible to the reader.

    Writing is all about communication, after all; in order to successfully communicate what you’ve got to say, you need to engage your audience. So first off, consider who your readers are – who are you writing for? Who’s going to read what you’ve written, and what are they hoping to glean from your writing?

    And why are you writing that particular content in the first place – what does your company hope to achieve by your work? Do they want you to explain something to a general audience? Persuade potential donors to contribute to your organization? The possibilities are almost endless, but they all have one point in common; successful writing engages its readers and meets them where they are. (And that’s not necessarily exactly where YOU are! But you are writing for your readers – not for yourself.)

  76. nerdgal*

    As a college freshman, I took a class that required “The Elements of Style” by Strunk and White. (The class was taught by a noted PhD economist who was full professor.) Strunk and White is still one of the best books about how to write effectively and clearly. I used it throughout my career as an engineer.

    1. Eldritch Office Worker*

      I keep a copy of this in my office! It’s very helpful when I have to teach others to write for clarity.

  77. Anon for this*

    LW1: People writing *public policy* should absolutely be focused on clear, tight, concise writing that is accessible to laypersons. Passive, complex academic writing style in policy documents is absolutely perceived by both the public and by public servants as intentionally obfuscating and bureaucratic. We can’t engender the trust of the public if we refuse to write policy that people can understand without a PhD. Your job clearly is about conveying important information to the public, so it’s your responsibility to consider the communication and information needs of the various constituencies/stakeholders on the receiving end of these comms!

    Academic writing absolutely does NOT lend itself in a straightforward manner to non-academic contexts. I work with a lot of academic researchers and this is a persistent challenge. These are the five pieces of feedback I give most to people who are writing “academically” when the purpose is not an academic context, and they change the game on any piece of writing pretty much instantly.

    1. Use ACTIVE VOICE. (“If you can follow the phrase with ‘by zombies’ and it makes sense, that’s passive voice.”) Most research writing is passive voice and this is a hard habit to unlearn. Nothing poofs into existence. Tell who did a thing or who needs to do the thing or what caused the thing.
    2. Every adverb needs to fight for its existence. If it ends in -ly, I am gunning for it. Be sure you REALLY need it for comprehension, or kill it.
    3. FACTS about a situation are not necessarily ANSWERS to a question.
    4. No one is paying by the comma. If there are 37 commas in your sentence for the love of Pete, STOP. Break that thing down. Corollary: there is no prize for “most words said with fewest uses of the period.”
    5. Unless you are at an academic event or writing for an academic journal, no one is coming to hear about your science project. They are here to understand that you recognize a problem/issue that resonates with them and that you have achieved/propose a solution that addresses it in a way that is measurable/provable. Lead with problems, outcomes, and impact.

    People who get PhDs do grueling work and get a communication style hammered into them that is unique and specific to academic/scientific environments where the purpose is SHOWING OFF THE SCIENCE. That is a good and valid purpose in appropriate settings. However, in the vast majority of professional situations, that is simply not the purpose. Academic research writing really does not focus on understanding the information needs of the reader/listener.

  78. Brian*

    Letter 3: As a teacher, I’m often worried about kids with IEPs that excuse poor/lazy/violent behavior. When they turn 18, that all vanishes, and if you tell your boss ‘I don’t wanna’ then you’re not going to get paid.

  79. A Simple Narwhal*

    #1 You should check out the Hemingway editor. (HemingwayApp [dot] com) It analyzes for spelling and grammar, but also readability! It’s really easy to use and super helpful, you just paste in the text and it will highlight where you could improve.

    To quote the site, “Hemingway Editor measures readability using grade levels. The lower the grade level, the more understandable your prose is. Grade 9 is the adult average. But, low grade levels do not make your writing childish. Instead, they show that complexity isn’t getting in the way of your message.”

    I know you pride yourself on your clear writing, but an important part of writing is knowing who your audience is. Clear writing to one audience is nonsense to another, and right now it sounds like you’re writing to the wrong audience, which means you are not writing clearly. And in fact, it sounds like you are writing so unclearly that you are in danger of getting let go from your job altogether!

    Look, I understand it sucks to do something you feel is “beneath” you, but writing for a different audience isn’t dumbing something down, it’s part of being a good writer. Perhaps reframing it in your mind this way will help you out?

    1. sb51*

      The quote about “low grade levels do not make your writing childish. Instead, they show that complexity isn’t getting in the way of your message” reminds me of my high school French classes. We were finally hitting the ability levels of being able to read “real” literature in French, but struggled with especially complex language or really wide vocabularies. So we read Sartre and Camus. Who both presented incredibly complicated ideas in extremely clean, spare prose. It took a lot of thought to understand the *point* they were making with their stories, but understanding the *language* used to get them across wasn’t the barrier.

  80. Queen of Comms*

    OP1, I know that many other commentors have already weighed in, but I am in a similar position to you. I was in academia for many years – notably the English Department of a large and reputable university. I now oversee corporate communications for a sizable corporation.

    In academia, your writing is a direct reflection of your education and your ability to reason. There is a lot of YOU in every sentence you write. This is due to the inherent competition between peers to be the smartest one in the room. It also stems from a moral desire to consistently push your field of study ahead with new thoughts – to say things in ways that are nuanced and original.

    Your goals as a writer in the corporate world are different, and your skills will be assessed differently. The goal is no longer to provide nuance or to present concepts in novel ways. The goal is to take information from one group and give it to another. Your skills will not be rated based on your grasp of collegiate vocabulary or your knowledge of theory. You will be rated based on your ability to effectively convey information with as little confusion as possible.

    In academia, your goal was to write. In the business world, your goal is to communicate.

    My best advice is to quietly read your writing out loud before you send them for review. This will help you identify overly complicated sentences, swap “big words” for smaller ones, and adjust the tone overall.

    My other advice is to not lose your education. After years of writing in a corporate style, I felt some of my writing flexibility fade. It became harder for my brain to click into an academic or creative style. I now (try to) carve time out every day to write creatively – 1,000 words of prose, journalling, a poem or two. It will help your mind stay limber even as you expand your writing skill set to encompass corporate communications.

    1. A Simple Narwhal*

      “In academia, your goal was to write. In the business world, your goal is to communicate.”

      This 1000%, incredibly well said.

  81. AndersonDarling*

    #1 I’m laughing at the idea that our congressional leaders want to read academic style writing. The OP must be new to working with government representatives.
    The more power a leader has, the less time they have to read.
    Winning a political position does not mean they read above a 5th grade level.
    The most intelligent and effective government employees I have worked with have the least amount of time available, so if you want to communicate with them, you have to communicate plainly and clearly.
    Know your audience, don’t guess who they are.

    1. Eldritch Office Worker*

      Yep, this is true in most professions – the higher you are the more you skim – but you have to take into account the volume of content government representatives are reading. They aren’t going to stop and decipher, they’re just going to move on.

      1. MsM*

        Yep. Our CEO is an academic. He has no trouble understanding complicated jargon. But if I don’t spell out exactly what I need him to do in simple bullets, he’s going to blow right past the thing I need him to focus on and latch on to some bit of esoterica.

      2. Writer Claire*

        Years ago, I worked in a department that (among other things) evaluated microchips and produced highly detailed, 100-page reports about them. Manufacturing departments would order the reports and make decisions based on them. My job (among other things) was to take these reports and reduce them to five pages for our CEO and VPs. This taught me so much about clarity.

  82. PB Bunny Watson*

    LW #1, as an academically-inclined person, I have the same problem. While the average American has a 7th or 8th grade reading level, about half of adults in the US read at or below a 6th-grade level. I don’t know where you are, so this might not apply to you… but it helped me understand why so many people weren’t following my “clear” instructions. Now I use AI to take my writings and bring them to the level of anywhere between a 6th grade reading level and a 4th grade reading level. It has honestly made it a lot easier for others to understand. Words I thought were common to everyone often… just aren’t.

  83. Eldritch Office Worker*

    LW1, I would really encourage you to stop thinking of this as “dumbing down” your writing – I believe that might be your manager’s language, so I get why you would have latched onto it, but what you’re actually being asked to do is write more clearly.

    If it helps contextualize, I used to work in museum curation and the target writing style for that is about a 5th-6th grade level (10-12 years old in the US). It’s not to “dumb it down”, in fact a lot of the writing is designed to communicate very complex concepts, but to make it accessible.

    1. AndersonDarling*

      I was pondering more on the topic, and it really comes down to accessibility. It’s almost classist. I only want my equals to understand, so I will only use language the elites can comprehend.
      I have seen a huge shift in medical publications. They used to all be written in academic language, but now I am seeing 70% written in common terms. There has been a shift to share knowledge with everyone rather than keeping it among peers.

  84. PNut Gallery*

    LW4 – my partner and I have worked at the same company for the 21 years we’ve been together (and each longer than respectively before we met), and have multiple times had to contact each other’s boss for various emergencies or issues. Sometimes we’ve known the boss but others we haven’t and the boss is only barely aware we work for the same company. At no time was it ever comfortable – it feels like it’s crossing a work/life boundary – but when it’s necessary it just is.

    So yes, get the information from your spouse and if it’s ever needed you just make the call, introduce yourself, explain why you’re calling with the necessary details and let them know when you or spouse will follow up with further details. It could be as simple as *spouse was in a fender bender but is in hospital and will call you tomorrow* to *spouse was in a car accident, they’re expected to recover but we don’t have further details yet so either they or I will call you again on Monday to let you know*.

  85. Mike*

    It’s interesting that everyone is assuming that LW1’s boss is right in this case, perhaps because of the sarcasm embedded in the post. Yes, writing styles need to change, but it is possible that the boss is going way overboard. I would note that LW1’s letter is simple and clear to read.

    1. Sola Lingua Bona Lingua Mortua Est*

      At least in the US, “the boss is never wrong” is baked into almost every difference of opinion. LW1’s writing may be perfect, but if it’s not what the boss wants, that an $3 will get LW1 a cup of coffee.

      We get paid for what Management wants, not what’s right or correct.

      1. A New Day of Anon*

        When we’re talking about a communications-oriented role, this is a bit reductive.

        I’m siding with the manager, but I have a very strong suspicion that they have faulty instincts when it comes to making LW1’s writing more effective for stakeholders. A manager like this can turn A- work into something still passable, but call for edits that turn a D into an epic communications fail.

        When they have a team with strong skills to begin with, this kind of manager can produce good work even if their team questions their guidance. With someone like LW1, nothing works and there’s no mutual credibility.

    2. Eldritch Office Worker*

      I would simplify the writing in the letter if I were sending it to a government rep and expected them to read it.

      1. MsM*

        Yeah, all I needed to see was “far from inaccessible” to side with the boss. Just say you think you’re a good communicator and/or know how to write clearly, LW1.

        1. fhqwhgads*

          Yeah, like, turning it around on the LW: your goal should be “accessible” not “far from inaccessible”. How would you rather your work be judged “nowhere near bad” or “good”?

    3. Retired Vulcan Raises 1 Grey Eyebrow*

      Nope, that letter was poorly written, neither “simple” nor “clear to read”. Too much showing off and too little concern for clarity, let alone brevity.

      If the OP normally writes like that, then she’s lacking the skills to do her job and the PIP indicates she is in danger of losing it.

    4. bamcheeks*

      I didn’t! But I think the bigger problem here is that LW doesn’t seem to have made any attempt to look at their writing objectively or to compare it with (relevant) standards or models of best practice: the whole letter is about their feelings about their own writing, their feelings about their boss, and their assumptions about their boss’s feelings. It’s a major shortcoming to be unable to evaluate (or defend!) the quality of your work product on any basis except your feelings, IMO.

    5. Hyaline*

      I mean, it’s in fact possible that LW’s read on the situation is correct and the boss is punishing her for being an academic because the boss is insecure and intimidated. It’s also possible that the LW is attributing normal management and on-point corrections to “the boss is intimidated by me” because of an outsized confidence in her own intellect and capability. Either way, the reality is “do what the boss wants, get a new job, or get fired.” And that goes for the writing, but also for all the other things that I presume landed LW on a PIP.

      Yeah, quite a bit of the piling on regarding the clarity of this letter wouldn’t have happened in any other circumstance. (We’ve seen plenty of letters with far poorer clarity; it’s typically not even noted in the comments). It makes sense; people are using the letter as a writing sample, which becomes evidence, and most people had made up their minds about the LW from what honestly comes off as a poor attitude in the letter. (FWIW I’m a professional writer and I teach writing. The letter was fine. And further, it probably shouldn’t be used as a sample of what LW produces at work given that the audience and purpose is completely different here.)

    6. Analytical Tree Hugger*

      Maybe the boss is going overboard. But, the more important parts are:

      1) Boss has the authority to fire LW1.
      2) LW1 is on a performance improvement plan, so needs to change their performance to keep their job.

      So even if their boss is objectively wrong, LW1 livelihood is at risk, so advice from AAM and the commenters reflect that reality (i.e., “Adapt and survive, here are some suggestions how”).

    7. Disagree a bit*

      English is my second language and I had to guess for adjunct/collegiate/codified.
      Double negations as “far from inaccessible”, as beautiful as they are, interrupt the flow of text as well.
      The letter is clear to read, but it is not simple.
      I do not care very much about this as I am always happy to learn new words or ways to express myself in English. But this is my spare time! If it was work, I would be annoyed if somebody repeatedly chose to make communication more complicated than necessary just because they want to show off.
      You are right, of course, that the boss could be going overboard. But there is a lot of contempt in the letter, so I am likely to believe the manager is justified.

    8. Irish Teacher.*

      Yeah, it’s easy to read, but it’s kind of awkwardly written and a lot of people are unsure of what the random quotation marks mean in context – are those direct quotes from the manager or is the LW being sarcastic or implying the manager was being ridiculous about those comments?

      So yeah, I reckon the manager was right and that the manager isn’t really complaining about the LW’s writing being difficult but rather about it not being phrased most effectively or in the style the tasks require.

      Plus, I really don’t think it matters. The LW is on a PIP at least partly for their failure to conform to the company’s style. Even if the boss is being ridiculous and they want a style less effective than the LW’s, that is what the LW needs to do if they want to keep their job. At this point, it doesn’t matter who is right. The company gets to decide what style it wants communication written in.

      1. Observer*

        I certainly was not intending to lay into the letter writer. But clearly, it’s a perfect example of writing sounding perfectly appropriate to the writer, but not being suitable to the purpose and context.

        I’m being serious, not snarky. I’ve always considered myself a good writer, but clearly I missed the mark here. Because even if what I wrote was technically perfect (which I’m actually claiming, but for argument’s sake), it was not fit for its purpose, which makes it a bad piece of writing. Context matters.

        But also, it’s a perfect example of a different point which has been mentioned here. Say I was objectively right and Alison wrong. Would it change anything? No. Alison gets to call the shots, and she decides what is suitable to post and what’s not. Now obviously the stakes here are much lower than your employment. And Alison has ultimate authority here, unlike your boss who has to answer to her management. But fundamentally, it’s really similar. If your boss is telling you that you need to change your language, to the point of being on a performance improvement plan, it’s her assessment of your writing that is going to decide whether you keep your job. Not yours.

  86. MHG*

    LW3 — my husband and I keep a document called “What if one of us gets hit by a bus” that keeps all of our different info that the other would need to know, including our boss’ name, phone number and email. We also have things like life insurance policy numbers on it. I know it seems a little morbid, but it honestly makes me feel less anxious about something like that happening because that would be one less thing to panic about. A

  87. Lissa Landon*

    OP1, I can empathize. Where I work now, anything that goes to the C-team has an executive summary and bullet points, and it had better not be longer than 1 page (and they like them best when they are not a full page). They like having the longer explanation, and especially the data, attached, so they can believe we did the work, but nothing I’ve seen in any of our meetings has led me to believe they have read anything other than the first page of any report or recommendation.

  88. dulcinea47*

    The reading level of the average american is low. No, lower than that. No, they still don’t understand those words.

    1. pally*

      Wince!

      Not claiming to be any more educated than the average American. To make sure I comprehend the message, I look up the words I’m not sure about. Computers and phones make that a snap these days.

  89. Jane*

    I am the clearest and most concise email writer at my place of work and I’m the only one who has an academic background. I write things not just for colleagues/peers but for an audience with VERY limited English/ESL speakers. It’s surprising to me that people take the view that academia inevitably causes someone to write in a more complicated style. IMO better/more skilled=clearer=easiest to understand. Also, in my experience chatGPT produces writing that is overly wordy, awkward and unclear.

  90. Ann O'Nemity*

    Ah, esteemed OP1, allow me to expound upon a matter of considerable sociolinguistic nuance that may illuminate the challenges you presently encounter in your professional milieu. I refer, of course, to the concept of code-switching, a phenomenon ubiquitously observed across human linguistic behavior, wherein individuals modulate their mode of speech, lexical choices, and syntactic structures to align with the contextual exigencies of their interlocutory environment.

    At its core, code-switching constitutes an adaptive communicative strategy that facilitates the negotiation of divergent discursive norms. It is predicated on the premise that linguistic registers are not inherently hierarchical but are instead contextually contingent. Within academic circles, for instance, the prolixity and terminological density characteristic of scholarly discourse are esteemed as markers of intellectual rigor and precision. Conversely, in many professional or non-academic settings, such linguistic verbosity may be misconstrued as obfuscatory or excessively esoteric.

    Thus, the artful practitioner of code-switching engages in a dynamic calibration of their linguistic output, selectively deploying register-specific features to enhance communicative efficacy while mitigating potential misapprehensions. This practice does not necessitate a diminishment of one’s intellectual rigor but rather demonstrates a profound acuity in audience design and pragmatic competence.

    To address your particular conundrum, I would humbly suggest the deliberate cultivation of this skill. Consider adapting your discourse to privilege clarity and accessibility without forsaking the integrity of your content. By attuning your verbal output to the epistemic expectations and semiotic norms of your audience, you may find that the substantive merits of your insights are rendered more palatable to those less enculturated in the rarefied lexicon of academia.

    In sum, code-switching is not a concession to mediocrity but an exercise in rhetorical dexterity and social intelligence. It behooves us, as purveyors of knowledge, to ensure that our intellectual contributions transcend the barriers of linguistic opacity and resonate meaningfully across the diverse echelons of society.

    2. HB*

      I know you’re being a little facetious with this response, but I love it so much. Wherein, predicated, “divergent discursive norms”? Pure ASMR for my soul.

    3. ADD*

      I love that this response actually conforms to the standard “keyhole essay” format that was drilled into students for decades in high school.

    4. AndersonDarling*

      What a fantastic example of the academic lexicon!
      I was able to read other comments of the same word count in 1/3 of the time required for this example. I was able to understand the general concept and theme being communicated, but all the nuances are making me wonder if there are secondary themes that I did not catch.
      This language is lovely when I want to exercise my neurons, but not great when I’m reviewing a project plan that I would be responsible for.

    5. Tobias Funke*

      I really want to thank you for this. It’s hilarious, it illustrates the point perfectly, and (this one is just about me) it channels my late father’s combination of vocabulary and sarcasm perfectly.

    8. Square Root of Minus One*

      This is amazing. Really academia-like, but clear too. This example should be in books about communication.
      This might be the one comment the LW will find most convincing.

  91. Juicebox Hero*

    Even in an academic setting, standards vary. In one college class (developmental biology. You want abstruse and esoteric concepts? We had ’em in spades.) we answered exam questions in blue books. For those unfamiliar, they’re small notebooks about 5″x7″ with blue covers and maybe 10 pages. The good part of using them is that you’re not limited by what you can squeeze into the space on the question sheet. The bad part is that you’re not limited by what you can squeeze onto the exam sheet.

    Before his first test, he gave us some advice. First, write to the level of your audience. In this case, you’re a biology student writing about biology to a biology professor, so understand that he knows what genes, enzymes, mitosis etc. are and that you don’t need to define those terms all over again. Second, focus on the matter at hand. If the question is, for example, “what happens if Enzyme Y attaches to Site A on Gene Simmons?” the sort of answer he wanted was “Face-rocking does not occur because Enzyme Y inhibits Process Q. If Process Q does not occur, it does not produce the Shazam enzyme needed to activate Showtime.”

    The students (including myself) who took that to heart did fairly well on the tests, using up about half a blue book for the whole exam, finishing well before time was up. Meanwhile, there were others who were on their second blue book just for Question 1, only halfway through the biography of Ace Frehley, and watching the clock in fear.

    How does this apply to LW1?

    Write to the level of your audience. This is what your boss is telling you to do because she knows the audience and the best way to communicate with them. Busy politicians and other government officials need the facts and whatever information they need to make an informed decision quickly before moving on to the next item on the agenda. Trust me, she’s not scared of your big words. She’s telling you your surfeit of discursive verbiage is not entirely congruous with the present communicational requirements, and furthermore she’s your boss so you either do what she’s asking or find a different job.

    Focus on the matter at hand. What are you requesting? How will the money be used? Why is this a good use of the funds? Who will it benefit? Because if you can’t convey that succinctly, it’s only going to slow down or even stop the application process.

    Speaking of succinct, another professor told me, “BS is BS no matter how good you think it sounds.” It was a real kick in the pants because I quite fancied myself the erudite wordsmith, but as I quit the ivory tower and found myself enmeshed in the real world… he was right.

  92. DrSalty*

    80% of good writing is knowing your audience and tailoring your language appropriately. You are letting your pride get in the way of effective communication.

  93. Bess*

    OP1, please don’t fall into the trap of thinking the academic style of writing is inherently more intelligent or skilled. Critiques that are focused on clarity and brevity are usually correct.

    I’m concerned that you have disdain for your boss and her advice. Take feedback, acknowledge you can learn new things like everyone can and does through life.

  94. Plath*

    LW #4– As someone who had to contact patient’s employers not infrequently, it is surprisingly easy to find who you need most of the time. You contact the main number, ask for HR, and explain that you need to speak with the boss/manager of X. I’ve never had this steer me wrong and it’s taken all of 5 minutes!

  95. I don't work in this van*

    On #4, when my spouse was admitted to the ICU in the middle of the night, I emailed his boss based on the formula of how their company does emails (firstnamelastinitial@companyname.com) because I knew his boss’s name and my husband’s work email. Depending on company size, it’s not too hard to get in touch with someone who can get you to the right person these days.

  96. Kat*

    LW2: I have a friend that recently mentioned when he comes across people who regularly stink (whether it’s them or their clothes) he thinks “sad, they don’t have anyone who loves them”. Bc in his opinion, anyone who loves you would tell you “dude, you smell”.

    Which is true. Wouldn’t you tell a dear one they had food stuck in their teeth? Or they have lipstick on their teeth? Or anything else like that? It’s mean to let someone walk around oblivious to how they look or in this case, smell.

    He might know he smells but he might not think other people can tell.

  97. Alan*

    For LW 1, one of the hardest challenges for me in grad school was slogging through academic writing. I’d read and reread the same paper over and over and then at the end realize “Oh! That’s what he means! He could have said that in half a page.” In my experience, academics write for precision, not understanding. Few if any of the papers I read in grad school required even a small fraction of the words they used to communicate their concept. I’d bet this is what your boss is getting at.

  98. Theon, Theon, it rhymes with neon*

    LW #3, this certainly doesn’t hold for a majority of jobs, but on my team of software engineers, I tell them that my boss and I care about two things, performance-wise: your projects get done and you’re responsive to your coworkers during business hours (or they know in advance when you’re not going to be, e.g. because of an appointment). Past that, if you want to spend the day watching cat videos on YouTube, you can. So we have two people with ADHD who get their work done in hyperfocus spurts, respond in a timely manner if someone else has a question or needs help, and absolutely spend much of the day watching cooking videos or gaming or whatever. One is a rock star individual contributor and the other is my manager.

    So it’s definitely possible to be successful while not having your day dictated to you hour-by-hour, minute-by-minute, in a one-size-fits-all approach, which is how the traditional school system works.

    1. Jenesis*

      Who knows, maybe if Mary is inclined to work in the digital space, she actually can get a job “watching Youtube all day” – as a video content editor, social media manager, listicle writer, or something similar.

  99. Aggravated orange*

    OP1, as a recovering academic I’d recommend focusing on simplicity rather than clarity. To us, academic writing is perfectly clear. But we can all recognize it’s not simple.
    When I write I go back and ask myself if this is the simplest way I could’ve phrased something. Would anyone reading it understand, even if English isn’t their first language? How much passive voice am I using (I have to de-passive-fy my writing a lot).
    Just my approach.

  100. Alan*

    LOL. I mentioned LW 1 to my daughter who’s written both academically and for public agencies and she was very pithy: “If you can’t adjust your writing for different audiences, you’re not as good of a writer as you think you are.”

  101. Pizza Rat*

    I find myself wondering if LW1 would be less annoyed if the boss hadn’t used the phrase “dumbing down,” and indicated that she couldn’t understand them. That makes the demand sounds personal and I can understand the annoyance on that basis.

    I’ve never been in academia, but I’ve been asked not to use “SAT words” in my professional writing. You need to know your audience to be effective.

    Some companies have communications guidelines, but not all. I think they’re helpful.

    1. MsM*

      I still go by my tenth grade English teacher’s rule of “never use a ten dollar word if the dime a dozen ones will do the job.”

    2. HB*

      I had this thought as well – particularly when Chat GPT was mentioned. I think the LW should probably ask for a bunch of examples of the type of writing the manager wants. It’s a lot easier to write *to* a style than it is to adjust yours based on negative feedback.

      1. Cinnamon Stick*

        I like your idea of asking for examples, especially because I think the boss in the latter sucks at giving constructive feedback.

  102. Sigh.*

    As someone who is staunchly against “AI” (it’s really just machine learning, people) in ANY kind of writing or art capacity due to its entire existence being due to copyright theft, I am super disheartened to see so many people here using it to “improve” their writing. I know I’m probably just a pebble against a river at this point, but that loss of critical thinking, writing, and EDITING that only a human being can do, to gain only convenience, is going to be felt down the line and we will be poorer for it.

    1. More Stuff*

      As someone who works in special education, the answer to #3 is indeed that she will find an environment that does not require the pretty incredible amount of compliance that a public school classroom requires. It drives me kind of nuts when teachers act like skills like listening quietly or being exactly on time are as important now as they were when most jobs were factory work.

      It’s also very possible that when this student has the additional autonomy afforded to adults in society, she will be better able to regulate at her job since she won’t be receiving instructions from authority figures basically 100% of the time (which is often the case as a child).

      Sounds like she is pretty great at self-directed learning, which is a very valuable skill for a modern workforce!

    3. Cinnamon Stick*

      Seeing ChatGPT in the letter made me twitch. I would never let it edit something I wrote. It doesn’t understand what it writes.

      Maybe with enough of us as pebbles, we can at at least slow the deluge of it.

    4. Lenora Rose*

      I hate the plagiarism machine because of its plagiarism and environmental costs, but I also argue regularly that it doesn’t teach the skills themselves. So now the OP can write their overly florid complicated language, push a button and get something maybe coherent that looks like the same thing but simpler… but does this actually give them the tools to figure out whether the result actually says what they want it to say, in the language their boss actually would prefer?

  103. Alex*

    I once fired someone for doing a higher level of work than what we were asking for. She insisted that she could not possibly do “lower quality” work because that wasn’t who she was. So definitely take the feedback seriously if you want to keep your job! They are telling you it isn’t what they need.

    1. Alan*

      OMG. Yes. I was once given someone to help me do a task at work and I heard the quality speech so many times from him. He spent months working on things that should have taken a week or two at the most, telling me that he refused to compromise on quality. “Polishing the cannonball” we used to call it. I was too early-career and too overwhelmed to do anything other than work around him.

  104. Dr. Evelyn Lasagne*

    My father was an English major who worked for the state department of health and his job was specifically to translate data into reports and proposals that the governor and legislature could easily understand. It’s an important skill! And no elected official can be expected to have expertise in every area of government, that’s what civil servants are for.

  105. some guy*

    i have PDA-profile autism which shares some overlap w ODD (as the diagnosis currently exists) and: it absolutely sucks in most corporate situations! i do in fact mostly work for myself as a freelancer, not entirely because of it, but not having to moderate my emotional response to demands all day (as I used to do in an office setting) is a pretty big plus! but alison is also correct that ODD is frequently linked to trauma and neurodivergence and is not always a helpful framework for kids. in any case i hope mary is doing well wherever she is.

  106. SaltSmokedSalmon*

    For the ODD, I would add that there are lot of jobs with a lot of self-direction and initiative where supervisors only really provide general direction. For example, a friend of mine with ODD works at a museum where her job is to “bring more people in to donate” within budget. The how, when, where, and what are up to her and she’s able to act pretty independently. She’s getting promoted soon with less oversight and more responsibility which is exciting.

  107. ADD*

    Regarding OP1: one of the things I struggled with while completing my MBA was the business writing course we were required to take. I was used to previous courses where it was fine to be very verbose, but in this course we had to learn that sometimes less is more. It’s a hard transition to make – I still struggle with this when replying to emails, often having to stop and go back and edit what I’ve wrote when I realize that I’ve really gotten myself into the weeds explaining something. Anyway, what your boss is trying to say is good advice, though I strenuously disagree with how she’s saying it ( and using so-called “AI” tools to edit your work is a very bad idea IMO.) But taking the time to try to simplify your presentation (I wouldn’t call it “dumbing down”) can be actually really helpful in being understood and in communicating effectively. Like with any habit, it just will take practice to make it natural.

  108. Tradd*

    I’m convinced 50% of American adults are functionally illiterate. I deal with many non-native English speakers in my international transportation/customs broker job, but even the native English speakers in the US have reading comprehension difficulties from my experience. I have to use as few multi syllable words as possible and many short sentences and bullet points. I have to write just a bit above “See Jane run.” I can’t use paragraphs. I have to put each sentence on its own line. It’s ridiculous, but many of the people I deal with won’t understand anything you write. These are native English speakers in the US.

    1. dulcinea47*

      You don’t need to be convinced, it’s true. Fact is over 50% of American adults read below an 8th grade level.
      I had to write stuff for “the public” at oldjob and it’s like… “the public” doesn’t have the reading comprehension to get thru a single paragraph. And now I’ve used the word comprehension which is too big. (Now I’m in academia and while you can definitely go overboard with the obtuse language, but no one is mad at vocabulary.)

    2. Annie*

      I wonder if the need to give each sentence its own line is because of text processing difficulties exacerbated by usage issues with their device and/or “text wall trauma”.

      Device usages issues could include: wrong brightness level, wrong screen height, wrong amount of whitespace, having to zoom in/out a lot to be able to read something and then losing too much context the second you zoom in to a different part, etc.

      Text wall trauma could remind people of bad life experiences or come from a larger cultural association with long paragraphs = boring and/or bloated, whereas extra short sentences and paragraphs = fun and/or to the point.

  109. Lady Lessa*

    I can appreciate where LW1 is coming from, but please, please know your audience. I’m a chemist and reading a book about the beauty of chemistry for pleasure. I was expecting a lot of pretty pictures with not too much, nor too high of a level of chemistry. The book seems to be a cross of a text book with more pictures. There seems to be too much detailed chemistry for a casual reader, written in a fairly dry tone.

    And in the bubble chapter, no mention of soap bubbles nor foam (which is just bubbles captured in a fast curing material. (Those are fun bubbles)

  110. H.Regalis*

    LW2 – Grit your teeth and say something to him. Keep in brief, just like, “Hey, you smell pretty funky. You need to bathe and wash your clothes more.” The shorter you can keep it, the less awkward it will be; but it’s always going to be a little awkward. If he feels angry/sad/weird about it, then that’s how he’s going to feel. You can’t control how he’ll respond.

    Contraindications for saying something to him: If you thought there were a high probability of his raging out at you all—and it sounds like that’s not the case here)—then I’d skip it. You don’t need to subject yourself to the wrath of aggro people in the name of trying to be kind.

  111. Jake*

    #1

    I had to give somebody that same feedback. He was sending 4 paragraph, 500 word emails with 3 separate action items in the same email to construction superintendents. Then he’d be frustrated when they would only respond to 1 of the 3 items. These guys are reading emails on their phones while a saw blade is cutting metal studs loudly enough to require ear plugs, they cannot digest a multi point email.

    All business writing exists to effectively communicate, which means you need to adjust as necessary for your audience.

    1. Delta Delta*

      I’m an attorney. If someone sends me an email like that without it being clear why, I simply don’t read it. I used to work with another attorney who would whine that “nobody’s reading my detailed emails!” but let’s be real – what she said in 7 paragraphs could have been 7 sentences.

      1. Lilo*

        There’s also the “flood the other attorney with crap” strategy that some attorneys employ and, frankly, it just makes me mad. I’m overworked as is, if you have a decent argument, present it clearly, don’t hide it in a flood of words.

        1. Delta Delta*

          And some people just can’t land the plane. I think people are too worried about which words they use and the substance suffers. If the issue is “did Jonathan pay his portion by June 1?” that’s all you need to ask. There need not be fourteen sentences leading up to this.

  112. Pete*

    “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.”
    ― Albert Einstein

  113. Bookworm*

    LW1: Lots of people have talked about accessibility, keeping your audience in mind, etc. and I’d like to add another voice: I’ve performed open-records requests for advocacy organizations, etc. meaning your work may also be interpreted by advocates, legal teams, researchers, etc. Not a good or bad thing, but you can make it easier on us if you make the text less academic and more for a general audience. :P

  114. Person from the Resume*

    LW1, you chose to say that your academic writing style and word choice “confuse and intimidate” your boss!!! That’s a condescending assessment of your boss. If she’s telling you to use common, easier to understand words and phrasing in your work, there’s a good chance it’s for clarity for your audience and not because she’s dumb (which is what you’re saying about her).

    You should follow the guidance of your boss and what’s in your PIP instead of refusing to change because you’re so smart … which is what I think you’re trying to convey. But you actually sound inflexible and condescending and hard to work with to me. And like someone who’s about to get fired.

  115. bug*

    For lw 4 what me and my roommate did was we had a shared google sheet where we each had a page. Emergency contact info, medications, PCP, basically anything we thought the other should have access to just in case we collapsed in the apartment or something. It’s nice knowing you don’t have to scramble for accurate information if something bad happens.

  116. Name name name*

    I’m looking for good resources to teach effective business communication to some government project managers if anyone has recommendations. Simple language isn’t an issue, but ideas like Bottom Line Up Front and how to provide complete and organized info and recommendations to leadership levels above them can be a struggle. I’ve been trying coaching but an outside authority might be received better.

  117. Definitely not me*

    LW #1: I, too, work for a government agency. One thing Alison didn’t mention is that your state government might require writing to, say, an 8th-grade reading level.

    I’m a technical writer and one of the biggest challenges of the job I’ve held for the last decade is to take our legal counsel’s documents and rewrite them in plain English. I don’t know anything about your writing style, obviously, but one thing I do know is that attorneys like to write in the passive voice. Maybe academics do as well. My job is to try and shorten our attorney’s sentences by half while applying active voice whenever possible to make it clear who is responsible for what. For example, she will write: “(XYZ reports) must be received by (timeframe) in order to ensure compliance with blah blah blah.” I might reframe it as: “The (org/entity) must submit XYZ reports to (our agency) by (timeframe). This is important because (reason).” She and I have developed a great working relationship over the years because she understands it’s literally my job to reduce the reading level whenever possible. If you tend to write in passive voice, or if you take feedback personally, make an effort to stop doing both of those things.

    1. Space Needlepoint*

      One thing Alison didn’t mention is that your state government might require writing to, say, an 8th-grade reading level.

      I’ve see that requirement as low as 6th grade.

  118. SB*

    LW 1: if you need an example, this is what your boss ,” “I am far from inaccessible when it comes to communication and linguistic style choices.”

    It’s too formal for an advice columnist. It’s verbose when it doesn’t need to be. It’s not the right style for public communication, especially with government communication. It puts people on edge because they think you’re hiding stuff in the fluff.

    That sentence could easily be “my writing is accessible” or “I communicate clearly and directly” and it would mean the same thing. The point of language is to communicate. So don’t hide what you’re actually trying to say

    1. dulcinea47*

      This is LW’s personal time, maybe don’t tear down their letter, there’s no mandatory format for advice letters.

      1. Lilo*

        While I’d normally agree, here LW is specifically struggling with feedback about their writing being opaque and inaccessible and they’ve demonstrated that exact problem in their own letter.

      2. SB*

        I’m not tearing it down? It’s literally just feedback on their writing style. They think they’re being accessible. It was an example of what their boss may view as inaccessible.

      3. H3llifIknow*

        Pointing out that the letter writer is doing in the letter here is EXACTLY what the boss is complaining about, is not “tearing down” the letter. Before we got there, I KNEW the LW was in academia in some way, and really wanted us all to know s/he has a large and diverse vocabulary.

  119. Gretchen*

    OP1, I have been a technical writer and editor for many, many years, and I am all about writing simply. I would recommend running your writing through some readability checkers. Hemingway Editor (Hemingway app) is a great free tool that you can use to get readability scores for your content. The Flesch-Kincaid readability tests are excellent tools for getting a feel for how readable a piece of writing is.

    The Nielsen Norman Group (NNG) usability consultants recommend an 8th grade reading level for most content. If your content is for people who are university-educated, they recommend 11th grade level or lower.

    The products that I work on are extremely complex. Our writing should be simple, so that our users can understand what we write.

  120. 1-800-BrownCow*

    OP #1: Another vote that it’s not “dumbing down your writing”. Consider it an extra skill to add to your toolbox in being able to adjust your writing style to your audience. My strong suit is technical writing, which is relevant to my career. But there are certain documents and procedures that I do have to adjust my writing style for the audience. When I first had to start doing that, my first draft was my default technical writing style. But then I would go back and start changing up the wording for the audience. With more experience under my belt I’ve gotten fairly good with my first draft being close to the final version. I’ve received positive feedback from colleagues and during annual reviews for being to write for various audiences. I think your manager’s feedback is a good thing and could help you to be more successful in your career.

  121. Tammy 2*

    I also struggle sometimes to make my writing more accessible. A helpful tip is to use the readability score in Word. Go to Editor, then “Document stats.” This will calculate the Fleisch-Kincaid Grade Level score. For business writing meant for a broad audience, it’s best to aim for 8th grade level*, but if you have a lot of jargon/subject specific technical vocabulary that can push it up a bit higher.

    *This doesn’t mean your readers can’t understand more sophisticated writing, it just means you’re providing information that can be processed quickly by busy people from a variety of backgrounds.

    1. green fiddle*

      I came to comments to suggest this exact thing, but had no idea it was an option in Word! I’ve just been making do with free online tools that only scan so much before they want you to pay, or that I can’t use for confidentiality reasons, so thank you so much for sharing this!

      LW1, tools like the grade score level have helped me learn why my language was inaccessible and gave me room to test out tweaks that improved readability without sacrificing my personal style of writing.

      The best writing is the writing that people will read, and with time you may find that developing your skills for reaching a broader audience can be just as rewarding as showcasing your ability to connect with a niche one.

  122. Turtlewings*

    Re: LW4 and the coworker in a coma, I actually had a similar situation come up at my workplace a few years ago! Over Thanksgiving vacation (we’re in an academic setting and get 3 days off, and many take the whole week), my asthmatic coworker Dee contracted pneumonia. Our boss had taken off the week after Thanksgiving as well, and she was the only one who actually knew for a fact when Dee was supposed to return from vacation.

    Work resumed and days passed with no sign of Dee, but people mostly shrugged and figured she’d taken the next week off like Boss did. Little did we know, she was in fact hospitalized and receiving last rites! Dee’s husband did know how to contact her workplace, but it (understandably) never crossed his mind to do so during the crisis. Only when Boss returned, realized Dee was MIA, and tried to get in touch with her, did we find out what had happened.

    Dee recovered and returned to work, eventually, and Boss instituted a stricter way to keep track of who was on vacation and when!

  123. one of the annas*

    For LW2, years ago I heard a really interesting interview on NPR with someone who helped recent immigrants to the US adapt to the culture here. One thing she explained is that USAmericans are extraordinarily sensitive to body odor and believe it must be covered up entirely. It really helped my own thinking and being able to communicate it more sensitively too, in reframing that it isn’t so much a personal failing, but a specific cultural thing here that should be adhered to, especially for corporate success.

  124. CubeFarmer*

    LW#3: Mary has either figured out that she can’t get away with watching YouTube 90 percent of the time, she’s unemployed and living with her parents because she can’t figure out how to navigate the working world, , or she’s got a unicorn situation where her employer allows her to do whatever the heck she wants until the last minute where she dependably produces amazing work.

    I often wonder about these students who get through formal schooling with a series of accommodations and exemptions. While I know that the workplace is not like school in many important ways, and I know that schools are not able to accommodate every learning style effectively, I often wonder about what happens after school. It would be interesting to hear experiences from people who successfully transitioned from IEP to the workplace, and what that experience was like for them.

    LW#4: We had someone not show up for work for two days, and who was unreachable. His supervisor dragged his feet on reaching to this guy’s emergency contact (his mother,) for reasons that we didn’t quite understand. There was either a big problem, or maybe the guy was fine and just wasn’t coming to work. Either way, his mother should/would know. Turns out the guy had a “mental health crisis” (that’s what we were told–I suspect he OD’d,) he was safe, and his mother knew his whereabouts (in a hospital.) He ended up leaving the role because he needed to be in long-term rehab. I just looked him up on LinkedIn and he seems to be employed for a local politician, so hopefully he’s doing a lot better now.

    1. Dahlia*

      Seeing as she scored very well on the exam, she knew the material. She could also be in a job where she isn’t bored out of her mind and is actually interested in what she’s doing.

      Your comment has a lot of prejudice in it.

    2. Smol Bookwizard*

      I did not get accommodations or my autism diagnosis till I was in grad school, and I did indeed spend most all of college and grad school wildly scrolling the internet and triple-tracking my mind in a desperate attempt to self-medicate my anxiety and emotional trauma. I do fine at work now, partly because I don’t have to sit still and look appropriately attentive for hours at a time. I work with kids as an occupational therapist, so I’m always running about and playing with things, and not having to deal with making sure my face is making the right expression. I think if I hadn’t, I might have been a dog groomer or something, or a pet sitter, where I could also move around a lot and make weird noises without bothering anyone… I think I’d be very unhappy in a traditional office job, half the letters I read here seem like a terrifying situation to be in, but thankfully, the world is full of alternative options.

  125. It's Marie - Not Maria*

    Unpopular Opinion – Re: Defiance Disorder – As an HR Professional, I am sympathetic to those who have differences which can create barriers for them. However, I have no sympathy for the handful of people I have run into who are just a-holes and blame it on having this disorder or another mental disorder. In the workplace, under ADA, we are required to find reasonable accommodations to help someone perform the essential functions of their job. Taking away an essential function because someone doesn’t “want” to do it or doesn’t like being told what to do is not a “reasonable accommodation.”

    Many things that are tolerated in school are not tolerated by most employers. We are doing people a disservice when this is tolerated in a school environment, because they try to do the same things at work, they may not have a job. My nephew who is on the spectrum has had to learn this lesson the hard way.

    1. Dahlia*

      “Many things that are tolerated in school are not tolerated by most employers. We are doing people a disservice when this is tolerated in a school environment”

      No, we’re not. The point of school is not to create workers. You do not have a choice, most of the time, about whether or not you go to school. Therefore, it is necessary to do as much as possible to equalize learning. You have a choice about what job you have.

      And many children WON’T grow up to have jobs at all. That’s okay. They still deserve a learning environment that accomodates them.

      1. fishsticks*

        This, this, a million times this! Participation in the joys of learning should not be locked to how well it will mold a student into a worker.

        (Not that that isn’t an important lesson too! It’s just that how to do well in the workforce is its own separate lesson, and one that kids will have a hard time learning if we make them hate learning.)

    2. I Have RBF*

      I have a roommate who has an ODD Dx. He got the diagnosis after got fired from his literal dream job after an altercation with a customer (who was kind of Karen-ish) but he couldn’t deal and started yelling. He is literally on disability, because he can’t hold a job for more than about three months. He can only manage to work for himself, and even then has to not be face-to-face with his clients. There is no accommodation that will work for him.

      It’s a disability, and a severely limiting one, IMO. He can no more work closely with the public or a boss than I can climb ladders due to hemiparesis. He’s not an asshole. When he’s not being pushed by Karens or bosses, he’s fine. Put him under stress, and he goes ODD.

      There is no accommodation that will allow him to perform the essential duties of most jobs working for others or with the public. That’s why he’s on disability.

  126. knitcrazybooknut*

    LW #1, use what you know of your boss in this situation. I had a boss who was intimidated by big words, and would seriously tell one of our coworkers not to use them in presentations. We worked in higher education. And “big” was really just medium level. We’re not talking floccinaucinihilipilification here. Luckily the coworker was male and the manager had a bias that allowed him to get away with stuff.

  127. Molly Millions*

    Op#1: If the idea of “audience” is tripping you up (e.g. “the Governor should be smart enough to understand this!”), try to think in terms of “purpose” instead.

    If you’re applying for funding, the funder has to clearly understand the tangible impacts of the money. In that context, academic language doesn’t make you sound smarter; it can give the impression that you don’t have a clear plan or that the funding won’t have tangible outcomes.

    For example: “enable infrastructure upgrades to facilitate accessibility and contribute to the diversity of the workforce” is less effective than “build wheelchair ramps to accommodate disabled workers.”

  128. H3llifIknow*

    Ma’am, if you are six months pregnant, there’s a good chance, if you’re doing interviews in person that they can suss out that you’re likely going to be on maternity leave within a few months. Of course, you not be showing as much, but when I was 6 months preggers, there was NO doubt!

    1. Mo_lady*

      And yet, it happened to me. Didnt suss it out at all. New boss had kept it really quiet and dropped the news on my first day: “I haven’t told many people, and most folks probably just assumed I got a little fat.”

  129. I'm just here for the cats!!*

    in regards to #4. In these situations it’s important to know what your employers policy is for these types of situations. Do they call emergency contacts if they cannot get in touch with you or do they just mark you no show? I’ve worked places where they would try calling you and then mark you no show and I’ve worked places where they would send police tondo a wellness check if they could not get in touch with you.

    I think it’s also important to make sure that your spouse has a contact number for your work.

  130. Maisonneuve*

    OP 1, the governor and their advisor will spend only a few minutes reading diagonally. They don’t have time to read slowly or re-read paragraphs. You need to make it simple — not simplistic — if you want their attention and enable a decision.
    FWIW, academic writing should also be easily digestible. Otherwise, no one but other experts in the paper topic will care. Even other academics want easy reads.

  131. HiddenT*

    LW4: I highly recommend that you and your spouse make “Oh Sh*t Binders” for each other. A binder with all the paperwork that either of you will need if something happens to the other (whether temporary or permanent). Life insurance paperwork, copies of birth certificates, medical proxy forms, wills, and any contact info of people who might be necessary (employers, family, lawyers, doctors). When something terrible happens, the paperwork is often the worst part for the person who’s dealing with it, so having all of that in one place can be quite literally a lifesaver (or at least a sanity saver).

  132. Library Horse*

    In the end, Mary scored a 4 on the AP exam in my class.

    Dumb question from a not-American: is this good? Or do they mean 4% / an egregious, alarming fail?

    2. Lilo*

      AP scores are from 1-5, passing scores are 3, 4, and 5. In general colleges won’t take a 3 but they’ll take a 4. For instance, I personally got a 4 on AP Chemistry and was allowed into the accelerated chemistry track in college because of the score.

      1. name*

        College’s wont take a 3, but it’s not a bad grade on the high school transcript. It just doesn’t give you credit in college.

  133. fhqwhgads*

    LW1, I think you’re focusing on the wrong thing. I too would object to using chatgpt to “dumb it down” only because of the high-ish risk that it mangle the meaning. However, there is software specifically designed to assess the language used in a document. For example, there is one called Hemingway, which assess how readable something is using various criteria.
    I very much agree with Alison that you should reframe this in your mind from a “dumbing down” to “using the right voice for the intended audience”.

    1. Salty Caramel*

      Ha! I always found Hemmingway unreadable. Knowing this exists will keep me amused for the rest of the day.

      1. fhqwhgads*

        I am personally not a fan of Hemingway the writer, but the app serves its purpose, and I understand the reference in the name.

        1. Gretchen*

          Hemingway is not my favorite tool for readability scoring, but it is my favorite free tool. Readability scores are useful, but you can’t follow them slavishly.

  134. TinkerTailorSolderDye*

    OP#1: Genuinely, it’s not meant as an insult, it’s simply exactly what everyone else is saying; too much academic, not enough fluidity in the writing. Now…I’ll be honest. I hate that the manager is suggesting ChatGPT or other AI bots. I would suggest reading back through AAM, actually, for the sort of fluid writing that Alison uses for her advice, or reading some of the shortform columns online, from your choice of news organization. That’s a great way to learn how to write to the facts without sacrificing all of your prose, and it doesn’t utilize ~~Skynet~~ AI chat bots that would butcher your message. Just a suggestion, though!

    OP#2: Please say something to the poor guy; he’s likely so noseblind to his own scent that he doesn’t realize it’s so bad. He deserves to know so he can fix it without having an interviewer tell him outright (because some will.) Some will be kind, but I can remember a few managers of mine who were very unkind to interviewees. Best that it comes from family, with love and respect.

    OP#3: Man, your letter is 100% on the nose.

    Stepkid #2 has had a lot of diagnoses over the last 4 years, in no small part because everyone around him assumes that because he refuses to listen to the word “No.” that he’s ODD with the exception of his dad and I. He’s not. He’s just being a kid who had absolutely no structure in place as he was growing from toddler to child, and now he struggles because he does have relatively bad ADHD and a penchant for ignoring the rules because he was never held accountable. Well, we hold him accountable now, and though he hates it…he’s a logical kid, and that, fortunately, is working in our favor.

    “For what it’s worth, though, ODD is a controversial diagnosis and is often criticized as pathologizing normal child/adolescent behavior and/or trauma responses. You see it a lot in foster care, where kids’ response to traumatic circumstances is pathologized and they get slapped with that (extremely stigmatizing) label.”

    Alison is %100 correct here; I feel for Mary, because she likely had a similar situation (or a more traumatic upbringing) and now she is going to have a lifelong struggle. Fortunately, we’ve worked hard with SK#2, and he’s slowly, somewhat painfully, but slowly beginning to understand that we’re not being jerks because we want him to suffer; we’re saying no because he can’t just do whatever he wants, especially the dangerous stuff. I’m glad you wrote in. I’m glad that Alison posted this letter, and I hope that more people see it.

    OP#4: Alison’s answer is absolutely the right thing to do; SO has my boss’s number for that very reason. We will likely never use it, but juuuuuuuuust in case…I live by Murphy’s Law, and anything I can do to counteract that, I will. Also, I hope that your coworker who slipped into a coma was alright!

    OP#5: Please, please let your candidates know! It’s hard, I know, but it’s so much better to be open and forthright with the information…and a candidate who appreciates that will think much more highly of you.

  135. Telephone Sanitizer Third Class*

    There’s a lot to be said about writing for your audience and being concise. But I feel you, I once got scolded at work for using the word “metadata” for tags and labels because I “wasn’t in a technical role”

  136. Zippity Doodah*

    Regarding the ODD student: she WAS doing her work! The purpose of a class is to learn the material, with the classwork being a means to the end. Her test score shows she did learn it. She didn’t do it the way LW would have liked her to– in particular she didn’t go through the motions of pretending to be a Good Student — but she did do it and didn’t disrupt anyone else doing it. If there wasn’t any more she could be doing, like moving to a more advanced class, LW should have left her alone.

  137. MathBandit*

    LW5:

    I would definitely say something! Not the exact same situation but at my current company I had something similar happen during onboarding and it was jarring. The position required significant background checks despite being very entry-level (finance) so there was a ~3 week gap between accepting the job and starting. A week before my start date I called the branch to confirm everything was still on track and said “Hi, my name is MathBandit. May I speak to Kyle (the manager who I interviewed with, hired me, and I would be reporting to)?” and got back ‘Hi, my name is Susie, I’m the new manager’. It was very jarring!

  138. i like hound dogs*

    #1 needs to open their mind to the possibility that their writing can be improved for readability.

    I came from academia, have a PhD in English lit, now work as a copy editor for a Fortune 500 company. Writing in a clear, crisp way that isn’t overly dense and academic is definitely a skill. Sounds like you could work on developing it. It also sounds like your boss isn’t articulating that super well, but it is a truth nonetheless. I wonder if you could look at examples of writing that she likes, or if you could seek some out yourself?

  139. costume teapot*

    It’s funny–I have a medical condition that can happen basically anytime, anywhere and put me out of commission for anywhere from a few minutes to a couple days. I’m completely unable to respond or do anything for at least a few hours. I have had to write short medical memos to my smaller companies to keep in my HR file for “what to do” in case it happens while I’m at work, but I’ve never even *thought* to provide my husband with my boss’ contact information if it happened while I was off. I guess he’d just wait around ’til my boss couldn’t reach me and called him!

  140. samwise*

    OP #1
    You’re a (former) academic, so you should be familiar with rhetoric in the classical sense. In the simplest terms, that means, suit your communication to your audience. Even in academia you had different audiences. This is no different.

    If your boss put this on a formal improvement plan for you, you are not writing as clearly *for your current audiences* as you think you are. Take it seriously. If you have trouble telling whether you are clear enough, ask someone you trust who is NOT still in academia to eyeball your work. Ask your boss for examples of good, clear, understandable writing for the audiences your office writes for. Spend some time learning the markers of such writing. Practice writing that way.

    signed,
    former academic who had to learn this

  141. retired*

    Journalism degree; lifetime of writing for work. My theory is that there are 2 types of English: latin english and anglo saxon english. (“discontinue” or “stop”). I currently edit research consent forms for complex studies and for very ill people which have to meet certain regulatory requirements. My goal is 8th grade reading level, which is usually possible. I have written a one page briefing in a half day that explained a complex half billion dollar program for a governor and legislators. Not hard. Simple words, simple sentences, simple formatting…it comes down to putting yourself in the place of the person you are writing for. And yes, dyslexia is a thing…some people who are very successful care barely read.

  142. Lorax*

    LW#1, as someone who also works in state government and also writes reports for our legislature and governor to read, I can say that an academic writing style is not appropriate to the context. There is no such thing as objectively good writing. It’s relative: all writing is judged in context, and in government, the primary features of good writing are succinctness and clarity. To that end, “big” words, complicated sentence structures, long paragraphs, numerous footnotes, etc. are not virtues. In fact, professional communications trainings will often advise writing for a third grade level, not because people are stupid, but because people don’t have time to luxuriate over grandiloquent prose. Ensuring your writing is kept short and simple is also a DEI priority, particularly if your audience doesn’t have a college degree (most Americans don’t) or contains folks for whom English is not their first language. I’m assuming that’s not the case with your governor, but it could be the case for people you work with, and is *certainly* the case for the larger public. On top of all this, many governments have adopted directives to simplify communications across the board as a matter of basic accessibility. (For one example, check out the updated federal uniform guidance, which even goes so far as to set a target for number of words to cut from grant materials.) The long and short of it is that government writing usually needs to be accessible to everyone, and brevity is almost always a virtue.

    1. i like hound dogs*

      Very well said!

      I have an academic background and find it easier to write long, complex things than I do short, to-the-point things. I’m still working on it. It’s not “dumbed down,” and it’s not as easy as OP thinks.

  143. ubotie*

    For number 4: would your spouse’s workplace possibly call your spouse’s phone and you pick up??? And thus tell your spouse’s workplace that said spouse is unavailable because of X emergency reason?

    IDK, I just feel like this letter is REALLY overthinking things.

  144. Anita Brake*

    RE: LW #5: I was once hired at a company and just before my first day, she was selected for jury duty. She was out for 4 months, as it was a murder trial.

  145. Anita Brake*

    * just before my first day, my supervisor was selected for jury duty…my brain is moving faster than my fingers today!

  146. Colorado Winters*

    LW#1

    Look, I get it; you take pride in your writing abilities. I also understand how personal it feels to have your writing critiqued – no matter what you’re writing or for whom, it’s something you have to conjure from inside yourself.

    This is not about you.

    Recently, there has been a lot of talk about literacy levels in the U.S. According to the National Literacy Institute, 54% of Americans read at or below a 6th-grade level. 1 in 5 is functionally illiterate. These folks are your/your agency’s/your governor’s constituents. You MUST be able to communicate with the people you serve.

    I think it might help if you reframe what is being asked of you. You are writing in service of others, not to prove how smart you are. I work in higher ed in the advancement arm of a university. Do I always get to write what/how I want? No. But I’m using my skills to support others so that they can achieve their dreams.

    Also, keep in mind that SO many people would love to be paid to write full-time. If you don’t meet your employer’s needs, they will have no problem finding someone equally qualified who will.

    https://drlennecefer.substack.com/p/1-in-5-americans-are-functionally

    1. i like hound dogs*

      I mean … functionally illiterate or not, I don’t want to read a bunch of academic gobbledy gook when someone could just get to the point?

  147. MellowGold*

    OP1: This is actually the opposite of the problem I have during my work day, and I think it would be interesting to share another perspective.

    As a communications professional in a highly technical field, a large portion of my day-to-day is editing work to meet government requirements (e.g., plain language, 508 compliance, etc.). I can guarantee that all of the subject matters experts I work with (lovely though they may be) think they have an excellent grasp on these topics… and they just don’t. Truly, in more than a decade of working in my field, I can count on one hand the number of experts that actually appropriately use plain language (i.e., eighth grade reading level) to describe their work, and that’s because they are too in the weeds to realize a lot of their daily terminology isn’t common to everyone else.

    I’m often prone to frustration myself, because I know several coworkers think of my skillset as a writer/editor as a basic or minimal contribution to their work. I know when they see me come in at the end of a project to “clean up” work that was “good enough,” I’m fighting an unfair perception about the value of clear communications. Despite that fact that I have a well-honed skillset – spending several labor intensive hours fixing basic grammar errors and improving readability – what they see is that I just made the work “prettier,” not that I made it more accessible, understandable and palatable for a wide range of internal and external audiences.

    I will say it helps me to reframe my frustration, keeping two things in mind: (1) I wouldn’t want the subject matter experts I work with to be so hung up on grammar rules that they ignore other key parts of their work that mess things up downstream, and (2) my contribution is extremely valuable for making their work accessible to other audiences. So while I don’t know what your personal writing style is actually like, please know there’s value in my job of “dumbing it down.”

  148. NZReb*

    LW1, I manage a team of professional writers and most of our team training is about plain English. It’s a big deal in the writing world now. And it’s made our writing much better. I really encourage you to embrace it.

  149. Bruno's Mom*

    LW4: I’ve had two coworkers who passed away suddenly (right around Thanksgiving, oddly enough) and while one of them was family friends with the company president, I don’t have any idea how the other one let the company know as quickly as they did. I assume they may have had to just look up the company name on the internet and call whatever number came up. That coworker was not married, so it was a more distant family member than a partner/spouse that had to figure things out. While my husband knows at least first names of almost everyone I work with, I have very few of their numbers in my phone (we don’t have work phones and use Zoom and Slack to communicate for the most part), so I honestly don’t know how he’d reach out. I also have no idea how I’d reach out to his employer since he is in an industry where he changes jobs frequently and is often working at more than one place at at time. I’ll have to ask him what he thinks about those things.

    LW5: At my previous job, my manager took a month-long vacation either immediately after I started or possibly starting even before my first day, I don’t recall now. I also don’t remember how far in advance I knew he would be gone. Things were ok because I was working in the office and was being onboarded by the person I was replacing, but things were better once my boss got back so I could ask them questions like “am I allowed to work overtime”, etc. that my other teammates were unable to answer. I guess all of that to say it’ll be ok if you have someone assigned to help onboard the new person, and they’ll most likely really appreciate when you’re back! And while you should never have to work when on any sort of leave, if there is a way short important questions could get to you, it would be extremely helpful if you could reply to them occasionally while you’re out. But definitely remember to set boundaries and if it’s not a yes/no/one-word answer, it can wait till you’re back!

  150. Chili*

    LW1 you’re being asked to queue for people who are very short on time and need to skim. Academic writing is not skimmable. Even in legal practice (hardly an accessible style) you have to learn to simplify from academic writing as many of not most law professors are life long academics.

  151. Feedback*

    If you can’t handle critiques, reviews, editing, or changes to what you write you cannot be a professional writer. Full stop.

  152. RagingADHD*

    LW1, as a professional ghostwriter for many years, let me put it this way:

    If writing plainly and clearly is hard for you, and you think your manager wants plain English because she’s stupid, then your written communication skills are not as good as you think they are.

    Good writing is not about using big words and complex sentence structures. Often, flowery, obscure writing is working overtime to conceal the fact that the writer has not thought through their points with precision. The rest of the time, it reveals that the writer was not disciplined enough to do a hard edit.

    Write your first draft in as purple prose as you want. Then sharpen your pencil and kill your darlings until it is simple and clear.

  153. Cherry Sours*

    #3 Re: the smelly brother who is job hunting, another possibility pertaining to the cause is a skin infection. It is relatively easy to treat if you are aware you have it, but if someone does not suggest that it could be what is causing an unpleasant aroma, it may never be considered.

  154. Bike Walk Barb*

    To the point raised by LW4, it works both ways: How to reach the manager, and who the manager or a colleague is supposed to reach if something happens while you’re working. That kind of emergency contact info is often in an HR record that not everyone has easy or immediate access to.

    My team is 100% remote and the majority of people we interact with are too. If we were all in one building, in an emergency some people would be responding to the situation, and someone else would find that person’s manager and tell them. HR or the manager would be the person to reach out to a family member and let them know something happened.

    But how can you do the same thing in a virtual setting? What if I’m in a meeting with you and suddenly your eyes roll back in your head and you disappear from view? Do I just log off?

    We discussed this and compiled a team contact spreadsheet: Who to contact if you see something wrong with someone in a meeting that indicates an emergency. Optional to share contact info, fine to put any caveats or additional info that would be helpful. We included “do you want us to call 9-1-1?” and for that we need to know their home address.

    This isn’t something HR has thought about and provided any guidance on. We developed it ourselves. Thankfully it’s never come into use. We should probably talk about how we’d handle it if someone beyond the team appeared to have an emergency so that we could respond appropriately.

    I’m also realizing we’ve had a couple of new people join and we should periodically bring this up and think through a scenario the way we discuss other emergency procedures every so often.

    Anticipating comments, does this mean we might over-react in a given scenario? Yep, that’s possible. Would I rather run the risk of contacting a coworker’s spouse or calling 9-1-1 on something that proved not to be a big deal than have a valued colleague die of a heart attack? Yep. (75% of the heart attacks in the US every year are first-time attacks, per the CDC. Years ago a heart researcher told me that for the majority of people who die of a heart attack, it’s their first one and they hadn’t previously been diagnosed with a heart problem, hence my choice of this for my fictional scenario.)

    Who you’re going to call and whether you have the contact information are really, really good things to discuss with roommates, loved ones and colleagues.

  155. Need coffee*

    OP1, is your manager providing you with actual guidelines and obligations that need to be met, like a style manual or WCAG 2.2? Based on your letter, this sounds more like her mistaking her personal opinions for requirements.

    If she’s put you on a performance plan, she needs to either mentor you, or bring in some content experts to ascertain as to if there’s an actual problem. Because if her feedback is she doesn’t like large words and you should run your work through ChatGPT, I’m not confident she can coach you, or that she’s giving you a fair assessment. You need to be given training and examples of what you’re expected to produce.

    I’m a Content Lead with a legal background, and everyone thinks they can write, with plain English the new (and often completely misunderstood) fad. Research shows even specialist audiences prefer plain language, but they often have a different idea of what constitutes plain language than a non-specialist reader does.

    Plain language is also not about stripping out all complex language or ideas; on the contrary, it’s about explaining those terms and ideas in an accessible way. And if you’ve been hired to write policy and codified law, I doubt plain language writing was top of mind when they hired you. (Yes, law and policy should be written in accessible language. It’s not the same as what your manager seems to be suggesting.)

  156. Pregnant Hiring Manager*

    I literally just went through this over the past month! I have a small team of 4 people and am adding a head count for the purposes of taking a little off of everyone’s plate. I disclosed to HR and my boss around 10 weeks because it helped speed up the hiring process (they were starting to push the roll into next year and I really wanted (need) someone by quarter close as I might be on maternity leave by Q1). During the interviews, I disclosed to all of the candidates because it was important for them to understand that a) I will be out for 3 months and b) part of their duties will be covering some of my tasks. The candidate I selected (and who accepted!) said that she really appreciated the openness and honesty about what she’d be walking into.

    No organization is perfect and every department has its drama so I think full disclosure to candidates is important so everyone can assess if they’re truly the right person for the job & culture. Me being out for 3 months is going to have a big impact on the team/organization so I didn’t want this person to have any surprises.

  157. Agamemnon*

    LW1, I know the odds that you will see this are slim, but: I had a boss like this, and she was both correct and incorrect. Correct: Academic writing is often ill-suited for business and government contexts. Incorrect: Writing is not inherently bad just because it’s academic. So I do think it’s worth taking a look at your writing style and comparing it to successful grants, policy documents, etc. to see if you can make some changes.

    That said: the fact that your boss wants you to “run it through Chat GPT” (!!!) is a HUGE red flag. That’s not how LLMs work and it will NOT make your writing clearer. If this is what your boss thinks good writing is, then your boss has absolutely terrible judgement and will likely not be able to communicate to you what changes she wants.

    I think you should assume that in order to make your current boss happy, you will need to change the way you write, so you should be lining up other resources that will support you in that change. I also think–contrary to what I’m seeing is the overall mood here–that you’re right about how preposterous your boss’s reaction was, and you should start looking for jobs with smarter, more effective bosses.

    1. far out*

      I agree with this. Unless there’s a whole bunch of missing detail in this letter, I’m also genuinely appalled that HR approved this performance plan.

  158. Andromeda*

    Re writing, I wanted to weigh in on this because I write for a living and had a huge problem with adjusting away from “academic” style to begin with:

    Writing plainly and simply is a challenge in and of itself. I’m now a technical writer, and our audiences range from people who can’t code to senior developers. Sometimes, very rarely, we even write for end users.

    These audiences all need different considerations — obviously an experienced engineer would be able to understand much more technical language, but they also just have different interests and things they care about. Likewise you, as an employee, probably have different priorities to the CEO.

    And while yes, this is content and not style stuff, a writer should be taking these priorities into account when structuring a doc and expressing ideas too. It’s all value-neutral — it’s just about making sure people read what they need to read. Also, one register isn’t automatically “better” than another. And I say that as someone who has a big vocabulary and likes long words for the sake of it, when I’m just writing for myself. You are not just writing for yourself when you’re being paid to do it in a business context.

  159. French translator*

    #1: As fellow writer (translator actually, not a native English speaker), while I would take this kind of feedback very seriously, I would also be offended by the strong suggestion of using AI to correct the flaws in my writing. You boss should be able to point out what doesn’t work in your writing and offer specific feedback. As professional writers, we should be able to adapt our style to whatever is needed and have clarity as our main goal. Whereas LLM are known to produce terrible texts that are not fit for purpose!

    The only redeeming explanation I can find is your boss has already tried to correct you and you have been so set in your ways that the AI is the only way they could think of to help you get better independently. I hope that is not the case.

Comments are closed.