Management Malapropisms

[hyperblue]

A sales woman for a potential supplier used to phone me up reguarly to "touch base". It really got my back up and she never got any business from me.

I really don't see why people use this "management speak", they just end up sounding like David Brent.

I suspect there's strong correlation between poor managers and the use of this bullst.

[sleep envy]

for the truly thick he waits a while and then asks 'what?'

they'll usually repeat the phrase and he'll ask 'what?' again by which time the entire cluster of desks is pissing themselves

'normal' english resumes and then'll he ask why they didn't say that the first time round

the poor NLP'd bds don't appear to understand any other approach

[The Black Flash]

WhoseGeneration said:

Pothole said:

I got an e-mail the other day from some manager or other in which he said we were working hard to irradiate errors.

I dunno, the nuclear option, as a solution, is often suggested here.
Should've replied, "Source please".

Oh, very good sir

[Mobile Chicane]

My most recent boss would refer to a 'meeting' as an 'engagement point'. tt.

One before that - American and even more of a tt - pronounced 'nomenclature' as no-men-CLAY-ture.

fk me, if you don't know how to pronounce a word, use another one!

[Podie]

"going forward" - well, which other direction do we progress in?

"starter for 10" -

[crossle]

I was once told by a newly promoted manager that I was not fersisticated enough to understand something...

After repeated probing, I found out that he actually meant "sophisticated" and I left soon afterwards.

[plasticpig]

Podie said:

"going forward" - well, which other direction do we progress in?

Sideways, upwards and downwards . In management speak, "You are guilty of two dimensional thinking"

[Kermit power]

themike888 said:

Think I must have heard the term "leveraging our synergies" about 40 times in the last two days. Ok its not as bad as some nonsense you hear, and actually does strictly make sense, but ffs, why not say "working together" or similar? The next time someone says it will be not without incident.....

"Leveraging out synergies" and "working together" aren't the same thing though, are they?

To put "leveraging our synergies" into plain English, I suppose you'd have to go for something like "let's work together to identify those areas of our respective offerings most likely to deliver mutually beneficial results if we concentrate on them, and then agree to do just that". Or something similar.

It might be a bit American, but it is undeniably the most efficient way of saying what you're trying to say. Unless, of course, the person saying it actually means something completely different, in which case carry on as you were.

[Carrot]

Kermit power said:

To put "leveraging our synergies" into plain English, I suppose you'd have to go for something like "let's work together to identify those areas of our respective offerings most likely to deliver mutually beneficial results if we concentrate on them, and then agree to do just that". Or something similar.

Like the translation

But in reality, why would anyone need to state the obvious? It is not like people are going to (by default), work together in the worst possible way in the most haphazard way possible - unless they are told otherwise.

[Kermit power]

Carrot said:

Kermit power said:

To put "leveraging our synergies" into plain English, I suppose you'd have to go for something like "let's work together to identify those areas of our respective offerings most likely to deliver mutually beneficial results if we concentrate on them, and then agree to do just that". Or something similar.

Like the translation

But in reality, why would anyone need to state the obvious? It is not like people are going to (by default), work together in the worst possible way in the most haphazard way possible - unless they are told otherwise.

I've seen plenty of companies enter into partnerships where they think that in order to demonstrate how committed they are to the partnership they have to show their willingness to partner across all areas of both businesses, where they would in reality have both profited much more from a highly targeted approach.

[BarnatosGhost]

Carrot said:

Kermit power said:

To put "leveraging our synergies" into plain English, I suppose you'd have to go for something like "let's work together to identify those areas of our respective offerings most likely to deliver mutually beneficial results if we concentrate on them, and then agree to do just that". Or something similar.

Like the translation

But in reality, why would anyone need to state the obvious? It is not like people are going to (by default), work together in the worst possible way in the most haphazard way possible - unless they are told otherwise.

Consider the wonder that is local government.

[jains15]

CVP said:

My pet hate of the moment is using the word "granularity", an example being "we need more granularity of this" instead of saying "can you show me the details".

Speak straight and everyone knows where they stand. If it's good tell me. If I'm in the cack tell me but don't dance round the handbags using words or phrases you don't understand!

Yes I hear this one a lot. I find it highly annoying - "so you want to make your data more grainy and less distict?" which is the opposite of what they are trying to say!

In fact, i've decided to pick the low hanging fruit with regards to this, and will imagineer a way of minimising the risk posed by this misuse of language, starter for 10 being the word 'granularity'.

[AnotherGareth]

Kermit power said:

"Leveraging out synergies" and "working together" aren't the same thing though, are they?

To put "leveraging our synergies" into plain English, I suppose you'd have to go for something like "let's work together to identify those areas of our respective offerings most likely to deliver mutually beneficial results if we concentrate on them, and then agree to do just that". Or something similar.

Aren't you trying to say "building on our combined strengths"?

[Carrot]

doogz said:

Hmm..

I'm an engineer. I work in an office full of engineers.

There is none of this bullst speak in here, the managers are all engineers too.

Some of the people you guys work for sound like utter fkwits. Is it the case that some of them are promoted up out of the way?

Correct on both counts, I reckon.

[MaxAndRuby]

I met someone at a conference recently who offered to give me a "helicopter view" of his business. Until then I honestly thought it was made up on PH along with the sizzling mental barbeque. I probably shouldn't have laughed, he looked pissed off.

[CVP]

doogz said:

Some of the people you guys work for sound like utter fkwits. Is it the case that some of them are promoted up out of the way?

Sometimes, but they still interfere.

Last management meeting I did pick "granularity" as my word of the day. Needless to say I romped home to victory over the words chosen by colleagues, with my word being used 7 times in a one hour call. So whilst I won, we all still lost as that's 45 minutes of our lives that are never coming back.

[dmitsi]

doogz said:

Hmm..

I'm an engineer. I work in an office full of engineers.

There is none of this bullst speak in here, the managers are all engineers too.

Some of the people you guys work for sound like utter fkwits. Is it the case that some of them are promoted up out of the way?

I'm in engineering and surrounded by engineers. Unfortunately I do hear this crap creeping in.

[pilchardthecat]

There's a lot of "reaching out" and "circling back" going on around here.

And no, i don't work in a gay bar.

[dmitsi]

pilchardthecat said:

There's a lot of "reaching out" and "circling back" going on around here.

And no, i don't work in a gay bar.

Just frequent them for the ambience?

[pilchardthecat]

dmitsi said:

pilchardthecat said:

There's a lot of "reaching out" and "circling back" going on around here.

And no, i don't work in a gay bar.

Just frequent them for the ambience?

No, the anal penetration