How different forms of jargon can alienate

Finding it hard to get support for important technical investments? I will often cover ways to improve how can communicate to reach your audience. Today we will focus on various forms of jargon.

Photo by william pietermans on Unsplash

Good ol’fashioned jargon

In technology, we are comfortable with our own jargon. In a field with always new concepts emerging there is always new terminology which describes these developments and helps distinguish them from other technical concepts.

How we name and refer to things is often linked to how they work or are distinct from prior developments. This makes lots of sense for people steeped in the intricacies of the field but can be alienating to those who may be beneficiaries of technology but may not work directly with it.

Just as someone who may not be very intimately familiar with the inner workings of cars may not know what a Solenoid is, a stakeholder you might have the support of may not be familiar with the terminology you use during your technical work. In fact, the use of jargon terms may alienate the people you are looking for support from and reduce the chance for support.

Using the example of Solenoid, it may not help to understand why it has this name but it is likely helpful to know what it does. The Solenoid is a component which converts electric energy to mechanical energy, that is, it’s one of the links between the power in your car battery and the physical movement of components such as those needed for ignition. It can be useful in mechanisms such as those that start your car.

Maybe less useful, but I will include for completeness; a Solenoid converts electricity to mechanical motion by using an electrical current passed through a wire coil to produce a magnetic field which will move a cylindrical metal core in the centre of the coil. You probably didn’t need to know this to know a broken one may be the cause of your car not starting. This illustrates the value that the benefit of something may have over understanding how something works.

As technical people, we are used to operating in a manner where we are explaining how things work. That may not be what is required for some audiences.

To remain accessible to a broad audience I might focus on the meaning and why its important over the terminology. Or at the very least, always provide a supporting definition that provides enough context to make informed decisions.

Acronyms

Acronyms are also a very common thing to find in technology. Terminology is often very specific and for this reason, can be long phrases which encourage contraction by use of acronyms for expediency and conciseness.

There are many problems with acronyms. They aren’t always unique, causing confusion. They are rarely easy to guess their expansion if you are not already familiar with them. But most of all they are another form of jargon. Terminology is specific to the field of work and not necessarily to the audience. In a common scenario, the audience might be leadership or stakeholders.

I am familiar with many technical acronyms having been in the industry for almost three decades. But it’s still common to experience acronyms which may be ambiguous even with context clues or ones I am not at all familiar with. I must admit that I can feel frustrated and sometimes, in the worst instances, that whoever is trying to communicate with me doesn’t actually care if I understand them.

If acronyms can make experienced technology people feel less than then I suspect the effect is more so for people whose field of experience is different altogether.

I will usually expand acronyms to be their full phrase and bracket the acronym if it’s useful for reference. If I can describe the meaning and importance without the acronym or lead with this and follow with the expanded acronym I will do this instead. This way you are providing the context the audience needs to understand the importance of what you trying to convey.

‘Load-bearing’ terms

The final example is what I call ‘load-bearing’ terms. We often find ourselves using terms in work contexts, especially but not limited to technical settings, which become ‘loaded’. What I mean by this is the term we use has so much meaning associated with it, it can be unclear how it is being used in a specific context.

Prevalent examples might be terms such as ‘agile’, ‘DevOps’, or ‘developer experience’. They have become convenient shorthand to convey rich collections of concepts that will speak volumes to some and leave others in confusion. Even those who may be familiar with the terms may struggle to know what specific aspect is being referred to. For example, if I use the loaded term DevOps, which aspect might I be referring to? Is it the concept of software engineers owning and operating services? It is some of the commonly associated build practices for deploying changes? Another aspect?

In the case of loaded terms, I recommend instead trying to be more specific. I also suggest trying to communicate in terms of the benefits rather than implementation details which may not be important for your audience to understand what the goal is and why it might be important to the organisation. This can ensure what you have in mind and the audience has in mind when you are communicating with them is as similar as possible.

To use the example of ‘agile’. The ideas of agile software development have been around long enough that whether you are in technical roles or not there’s a good chance you have some familiarity with the term and the collection of concepts it represents. It certainly has ceased to simply be interpreted as it might be described in a dictionary. And of course how close to the technical work will still influence the richness and veracity of your understanding. The chance to be misaligned in meaning is still high between people in different parts of an organisation.

What you may mean in a given context when you want to use ‘agile’ with a non-technical audience might be specific to a particular result being ‘agile’ might allow for. Maybe it’s flexibility or the ability to respond quickly to feedback or new information. Whatever it is, it will be more accessible if you are communicating in these more plain-speaking, more specific terms.

We might not all know what a Solenoid does (I barely do, I had to look it up to be sure!) but most of us know we need something that will start our car. Telling someone they need their Solenoid fixed may not result in them springing into action. Telling them they will be late to work unless they fix the problem starting the car may get a different result.

What are examples of jargon you’ve experienced in the workplace? Where did it become a barrier to understanding between people? Share your experiences in the comments below.