More Painfully Annoying Business Jargon - NSFW
Forbes had a good list that I captured here. Many colleagues came up to me though, immediately after, and suggested I add a few more. So, by popular demand here is another roundup of some painful jargon. Part deux (faux french and euro terms strike me as needing to be on the list too).
"Deep Dive"
If you're not in the navy or in mining, this term is off limits for you. What it really means in geek terms, is to get more technical, in the weeds (see below) or to simply add more details, usually of a technical nature. Let's just call it for what it is. "Can we have a more detailed discussion please?"
"In the Weeds"
Managers, are most guilty of this one. It's their way of remarking to themselves or the attendees, and simply asking the rhetorical question, "Did anyone get what I said?". Just prior to this is the customary third degree technical questioning completely inappropriate for a larger managerial meeting. Multiple versions of this term exist. The most heinous office-space versions involve people in the room, I kid-you-not, pulling out an imaginary weed whacker (Yes I know) and making a motor noise like so - RR-R-R. Really.
"Parking Lot"
A meeting consultant must have come up with this in the last five years as part of his/her unique vocabulary. Ever since it's made a cunning appearance onto the scene, it has become the catch-all for discussions that are usually not relevant to the meeting at hand. Oddly, if you pay attention, sometimes the person who calls "parking lot" i.e. requesting to defer an item for discussion, is the very person who digressed the discussion to begin with. People tend to have chats in a parking lot only to resolve fender bumps and nicks, or if in the midwest, to stock up on ammunition, so if in a meeting, call it for what it is. Not bloody relevant. This term needs to be euthanized quickly.
"Strawman"
Basically if I propose a complete hack, want to request feedback without being humble enough to be open about it, or don't know what the bloody heck I'm doing, I'm working on a strawman. If I just say I need help people surprisingly always offer to help. I just don't call it a strawman.
"Synergy"
If there's one term that's driven us techies up the wall over the last decade, its synergy. When someone means "I want what you have" or "I'm going to learn a lot from you" or "my people/tools/processes suck, yours are awesome, HELP" before or after "I'm going to acquire you", they cannot be honest about it and would rather say "lets find or explore synergy". It's one of those words that's morphed from a noun into a verb and adjective. Please stop with the synergies.
"Leverage"
Like synergy, leverage came into everyday business vocabulary as if our primary occupations involved the use of fulcrums and levers. I wish it did. Those were simpler times. I know the words 'use' or 're-use' don't sound complex enough, but that's really all we're doing. Let's just say that. Developers reuse things all the time. You'll never hear me say "let me leverage xyz's xml processing library". I'll reuse it.
"Traction"
Again, if not in the chiropractic or spinal disc realignment business, you've got nothing to do with traction. All you need to say is something is gaining acceptance, popularity or wider support. That's all. It's okay to use simpler words. Really.
"Google it"
This is an up-and-comer, but every bit as irritating. When someone wishes to impress upon you the very outer limits of their researching capabilities this is the term that is used. Usually it means they did a lazy search, and captured the first piece of data (not knowledge) they could find. I have a hard time placing my trust in someone who just read something 5 minutes before I do. I prefer expertise.
"Agile"
I'm working on a follow-up post just dedicated to this term. It has morphed from a set of principles from career programmers into an entire industry. It encapsulates and justifies everything from lack of design, insufficient documentation, poor requirements, collaboration over expertise, non-linear amounts of waste and sometimes poor practices, all in the name of delivering smaller pieces of value quicker to the end-client. The focus continues to be on getting 'agile' vs. delivering value using agile principles. There is more confusion than clarity on this one topic, and entire forums of software people bemoaning the state of agile affairs, and when the word itself is used as cover for anything and everything, it makes itself into the realm of jargon. Getting back to basics and rethinking is highly called for on this one.
Notable Mentions : "Bucketize", "Gap Fitment", Any permutations of the list above.
Ultimately this post is about making our meetings and our work environments more productive and accessible to all. We all have lots to contribute towards each other and to improve the quality of our work, but all of these terms serve as downers and meeting filler material at best. Jargon like these only help meander an otherwise meaningful discussion for no apparent reason. Some of these terms have existed for a whole decade. It is unacceptable. Let's take back our work environments from the consultant-speak, and bludgeon these terms into permanent oblivion. There is a reason the second S in KISS stands for stupid.
Now that's what I call synergy.
